(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Minutes"



■ • ■- . 






5 CLOSED 
ST> 




SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REFERENCE 
BOOK 

\(»/ In In- hihfii limn I lie l.ihni/\ 



jc 1 2 aw 

SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 1223 05718 3379 



\ 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/5minutes1998sanf 






.MINUTES 

'FINANCE COMMITTEE 

e BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

REGULAR MEETING 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

JUL 10 1998 
SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



WEDNESDAY, JULY 8. 1998 - 1:00 P.M. 



VETERANS BUILDING 
4 01 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 



MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 
ABSENT: Supervisor Teng for action on Items 1-10. 
CLERK: Joni Blanchard 
Meeting Commenced: 1 : 05 p.m. 



CONSENT CALENDAR 

All items listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are 
considered to be routine by the Committee and will be acted upon 
by a single, roll-call vote of the Committee. There will be no 
separate discussion of these items unless a member of the 
Committee or the public so requests, in which event the matter 
shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a 
separate item. 

a. File 98-0792 . [Prop J Contract, Shuttle Bus Services] 

Resolution approving the Controller's certification that 
shuttle bus services for San Francisco International 
Air-port can practically be performed by private contractor 
at a lower cost for the first half of £he fiscal year 
commencing July 1, 1998 than if work were performed by City 
and County employees. (Airport) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Severed from consent calendar. Amended on lines 
5 and 18 after "for" and before "the" to delete 
"the first half of"; amended on line 6 after 
"1998" and before "than" to insert 
", retroactively,"; amended on line 18 after 
"1998" to insert ", retroactively,"; amended on 
line 24 between "hereby" and "approves" to insert 
"retroactively". Recommended as amended. 



File 98-0797 . [Prop J Contract, Jail Food Services] 
Resolution approving the Controller's certification that 
the County Jail food service management operations for the 
City and County of San Francisco can practically be 
performed by private contractor at a lower cost for the 
year commencing July 1, 1998, than if work were performed 
by City and County employees. (Sheriff) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Severed from consent calendar. Amended on line 4 
after "1998," and before "than" to insert 
"retroactively,"; amended on line 12 after 
"1998," and before "can" to insert 
"retroactively,"; amended on line 16 between 
"hereby" and "approves" to insert 
"retroactively". Recommended as amended. 



File 98-0798 . [Prop J Contract, Own Recognizance Program] 
Resolution approving the Controller's certification that 
the San Francisco "O.R." Project for the City and County of 
San Francisco can practically be performed by private 
contractor at a lower cost for the year commencing July 1, 
1998, than if work were performed by City and County 
employees. (Sheriff) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Severed from consent calendar. Amended on line 4 
after "1998," and before "than" to insert 
"retroactively,"; amended on line 12 after 
"1998," and before "can" to insert 
"retroactively,"; amended on line 16 between 
"hereby" and "approves" to insert 
"retroactively". Recommended as amended. 



File 98-0799 . [Prop J Contract, Pretrial Diversion 
Program] Resolution approving the Controller's 
certification that the Pretrial Diversion Program for the 
City and County of San Francisco can practically be 
performed by private contractor at a lower cost for the 
year commencing July 1, 1998, than if work were performed 
by City and County employees. (Sheriff) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Severed from consent calendar. Amended on line 4 
after "1998," and before "than" to insert 
"retroactively,"; amended on line 12 after "1998" 
and before "can" to insert " , retroactively,"; 
amended on line 16 between "hereby" and 
"approves" to insert "retroactively". 
Recommended as amended. 



3 ,2 23 05718 3379 



File 98-0848 . [Prop J Contract, Parking Management 
Services] Resolution approving the Controller's 
certification that parking management services for San 
Francisco International Airport can practically be 
performed by private contractor at lower cost for the year 
commencing July 1, 1998 than if work were performed by City 
employees at budgeted levels. (Airport Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Severed from consent calendar. Amended on line 7 
after "1998" and oefore "than" to insert 
'• , retroactively,"; amended on line 17 after 
"1998" and before "can" to insert ", 
retroactively,"; amended on line 23 between 
"hereby" and "approves" tc insert 
"retroactively". Recommended as amended. 



File 98-0945 . [Prop J Contract, Convention Facilities 
Management] Resolution concurring with Controller's 
certification that convention facilities management, 
operation and maintenance services can be practically 
performed at Bill Graham Civic Auditorium and Moscone 
Center by private contractor for lower cost than similar 
work services performed by City and County employees. 
(City Administrator) 

SPEAKERS: None 

ACTION: Severed from consent calendar. Amended on line 5 
after "employees" to add "; retroactive to July 
1, 1998."; amended on line 16 after "1998-99" and 
before "; and" to insert ", retroactive to July 
1, 1998"; amended on line 23 between "and" and 
"approves" to insert "retroactively". 
Recommended as amended. 



File 98-0922 . [Emergency Repair, Hattie Street Sewer] 
Resolution approving expenditure of funds for the emergency 
work to replace the structurally inadequate sewer on Hattie 
Street from Market Street to Corbett Street - $93,870. 
(Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 



File 98-0923 . [Emergency Repair, Douglass Street Sewer] 
Resolution approving the expenditure of funds for the 
emergency work to replace the structurally inadequate sewer 
on Douglass Street from 24th Street to 25th Street - 
$164,164. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 

7 45243 SFPL: ECONO JRS 
?n£ c;ppt. ii/99/nn 7? 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 98-0934 . [IHSS Contract with Addus Healthcare] Resolution 
approving the contract between the City and County of San 
Francisco and Addus Healthcare for the provision of In-Home 
Supportive Services for the period from July 1, 1998 to June 30, 
2001, with a possible renewal for one year, in the amount of 
$15,313,457. (Department of Human Services) 

SPEAKER: Wil Lightborne, Dept. of Human Resources - reguested 
continuance. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to 7/15/98. 

File 98-0935 . [IHSS Contract with IHSS Consortium of S.F.] 
Resolution approving the contract between the City and County of 
San Francisco and the IHSS Consortium of San Francisco for the 
provision of In-Home Supportive Services for the period from 
July 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001, with a possible renewal for one 
year, in the amount of $15,457,500. (Department of Human 
Services) 

SPEAKER: Wil Lightborne, Dept. of Human Resources - reguested 
continuance. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to 7/15/98. 

File 98-1089 . [Bond Special Election, Academy of Sciences] 
Ordinance calling and providing for a special election tc be 
held in the City and County of San Francisco on Tuesday, 
November 3, 1998, for the purpose of submitting to the voters of 
the City and County a proposition to incur bonded indebtedness 
of the City and County in the principal amount of $79,880,000 
for the rehabilitation, renovation, improvement, construction 
and/or reconstruction of the California Academy of Sciences 
including funding for improvements to Golden Gate Park in the 
areas appurtenant to, or which provide access to, the California 
Academy of Sciences; approving necessary procedures to hold such 
election; consolidating the special election with the 
consolidated municipal general election for November 3 1998; 
and waiving the word limitation on ballot propositions imposed 
by Elections Code Section 510. (Supervisor Yaki) 

SPEAKER: Pat Kociolek, Exec. Dir., CA Academy of Sciences - 
reguested continuance. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to the Call of 
the Chair. 



File 98-0929 . [Settlement of Grievance, Local 6] Ordinance 
authorizing settlement of acting assignment of pay grievance of 
Ron Perez filed pursuant to the Memoranda of Understanding 
between the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 
Local 6, in the amount of Thirteen Thousand Three Hundred Fifty 
One Dollars and Forty Cents ($13,351.40). (Department of Human 
Resources) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Alice Vilagomez, ERD, 
Dept. of Human Resources - support; Cindy Monroe, 
Human Resources Mgr. , Recreation and Park Dept - 
support. 



ACTION: 



Hearing held. Recommended. 



6. File 98-0890 . [Contractor Permit Fees] Ordinance amending 

Traffic Code by amending Section 202. C, providing for contractor 
permit fees. (Department of Parking and Traffic) 



SPEAKERS 



ACTION: 



Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Stuart Sunshine, 
Director, Dept. of Parking & Traffic - support; Martha 
Gamble, Dept. of Parking & Traffic - support. 

Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-0891 . [Permit Fees] Ordinance amending Traffic Code by 
amending Section 314, providing for residential permit fees. 
(Department of Parking and Traffic) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Stuart Sunshine, 

Director, Dept. of Parking & Traffic - support; Martha 
Gamble, Dept. of Parking & Traffic - support. 



ACTION: 



Hearing held. Recommended, 



File 98-0979 . [Lease of Property at 626 Potrero Street] 
Resolution authorizing a lease of real property at 626 Potrero 
Street, San Francisco for the Police Department's Narcotics and 
Vice Divisions. (Real Estate Department) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Tony DeLucchi, Director, 
Department of Real Estate - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-0986 . [Lease of Property at 650 Fifth Street] 
Resolution authorizing a lease of real property at 650 Fifth 
Street, San Francisco, for the Department of Public Health. 
(Real Estate Department) 

SPEAKER: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



10. File 98-0995 . [Hotel Tax Protocol Allocation] Ordinance 
amending Municipal Code, Part III, by amending Section 515.1 to 
delete the allocation for the Office of Protocol. (Supervisor 
Kaufman) 

SPEAKER: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amendment of the Whole (as introduced 
by Supervisor Kaufman and further amended) adopted. 
Recommended as amended. 

LITIGATION 

The Finance Committee of the Board of Supervisors decided, by 
motion, to meet in closed session under the provisions of Government 
Code Section 54956.9(a) to discuss proposed settlement cf the 
litigation listed below, this litigation involving the City and 
County of San Francisco. This motion was made on the basis that 
discussion in open session of this proposed settlement would 
prejudice the position of the City in this litigation. 

11. File 98-0943 . [Appropriation/Settlement of Lawsuit, PUC] 
Ordinance appropriating $2,300,000, Public Utilities Commission 
- Water Department, from Water Department fund balance to claims 
and judgments for fiscal year 1997-98 and authorizing settlement 
of litigation of Hefter v. County of San Mateo, et al. by 
payment of $2,300,000. RO #97260. (Alameda Superior Court No. 
786568) . (Controller) 

SPEAKERS: Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney; Joshua Milstein, 
Deputy City Attorney. 

ACTION: Recommended. 



12. File 98-0978 . [Appropriation/Settlement of Lawsuit, PUC] 
Ordinance appropriating $4,907,500, Public Utilities 
Commission-Cleanwater , from Clean Water program fund balance to 
claims and judgments, for fiscal year 1997-98, and authorizing 
settlement of litigation of Howard and Iran Billman and State 
Farm General Insurance Company for a total settlement of 
$4,907,500. RO #97261. (Superior Court No. 980-740) 
(Controller) 

SPEAKERS: Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney; Cheryl Weisbard 
Foung, Deputy City Attorney. 

ACTION: Recommended. 



The Finance Committee of the Board of Supervisors found that it 
was in the best interests of the City not to disclose any 
information revealed in its closed session deliberations of the 
above items and moved not to disclose any information at this time. 



VOTE ON ITEMS 1-10 WAS 2-0 (WITH SUPERVISOR TENG ABSENT FOR 
ACTION ON THOSE ITEMS) . VOTE ON ITEMS 11 AND 12 WAS 3-0 (WITH ALL 
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT) . 

Meeting Adjourned: 2 : 07 p.m. 



Public Library,Gov't Info. Ctr., 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn 



zfjo.25 



f 4> /■?, Hi) 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



BUDGET ANALYST 



■P V. -N 



1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



Documents oept. 
JUL 71998 

SAN FRANOSCO 



July 2, 1998 
TO: ^Finance Committee 

FROM: ^Budget Analyst fte*«-i««- o*.+-..«j 4V mttA--.*.^ ,-C 
SUBJECT: July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item la - File 98-792 

Department: 

Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 



Description: 



Airport Commission 

Resolution approving the Controller's certification that 
shuttle bus services for San Francisco International 
Airport can continue to be practically performed by 
private contractor at a lower cost for the Fiscal Year 
commencing July 1, 1998 than if work were performed by 
City and County employees. 



Shuttle Bus Services at San Francisco International 
Airport. 

In November, 1997 through a Request for Proposals (RFP) 
process, the Airport Commission awarded a ten year 
contract to SFO Shuttle Bus Company for the operation of 
Shuttle Bus Services at the Airport. A resolution 
approving Proposition J certification for this contract for 
the period from January 1, 1998 through June 30, 1998 
was approved by the Board of Supervisors in November, 
1997. 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



The proposed resolution would approve Proposition J 
certification for SFO Shuttle Bus Company to continue 
performing shuttle bus services at the San Francisco 
International Airport for the period from July 1, 1998 
through June 30, 1999. Shuttle bus services consist of 
providing free ground transportation between the Airport 
parking lots and the Airport terminals and transportation 
between the Airport terminals for airline passengers and 
employees. 

Charter Section 10.104.15 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for work or services which had 
been performed by City employees if the Controller 
certifies, and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such 
work or services can in fact be performed by private firms 
at a lower cost than similar work or services performed by 
( Jity employees. 

The Controller has determined that Shuttle Bus Services 
at San Francisco International Airport for FY 1998-99, 
would result in estimated savings as follows: 





Lowest 


Highest 




Salary 


Salary 


Citv-Onerated Service Costs 


Step 


Step 


Personnel Costs: 






Salaries, Holidav. Premium 






And Travel Pav 


J JIT. (576 


$3,339,268 


Fringe Benefits 


1.146.297 


1,157,897 


Operating Expenses 


1.513.419 


1.513.419 


Total 


$5,877,392 


S6,010,584 


Contractual Services Costs 


4.823.376 


4.823.376 



Estimated Savings SI. 054,016 51,187,208 

Comments: 1. The Controller's Office advises that the title and the 

body of the resolution should be amended to state "for the 
Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 1998" instead of "for the 
first half of the Fiscal Year commencing July 1. 1998." 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

2. The proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively approve the Controllers certification as of 
July 1, 1998. 

3. The Contractual Services Costs used for the purpose of 
this analysis are composed of (1) the current contractor's 
estimate of the costs to provide shuttle bus services for FY 
1998-99, (2) costs for additional shuttle bus services, due 
to Master Plan construction, that were approved by the 
Airport Director subsequent to the issuance of the RFP, 
and (3) additional costs that are passed through to the 
Airport by the contractor, such as fuel and utility costs, 
resulting from the additional services approved by the 
Airport Director. 

4. Shuttle Bus Services at San Francisco International 
Airport were first certified, as required in Charter Section 
10.104.15, in 1980 and have been performed by a private 
contractor on an ongoing basis since 1971. 

5. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Airport's responses is attached. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to state, "for the Fiscal 

Year commencing July 1, 1998" instead of "for the first 
half of the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 1998", in 
accordance with Comment No. 1. 

2. Amend the proposed resolution to provide for 
retroactivity. 

3. Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



>»•''- "a*»~ . ATTACHMENT 

B 

CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

Depanment: Airpon Commission 

Contract Services: Airpon Shuttle Bus Services 

Contract Period: July 1. 1998 to June 30. 1999 

I. Who performed the activity/service prior to contracting out? 

With construction of the Remote Public Parking Facility in 1975. shuttle bus service was 
initiated by contract. Prior to 1975, the area was utilized as a small lot for SFIA emplovee 
parking. .An employee van service was provided by Airpon Parking Management (APM). 

-■ How many City employees were laid off as a result of contracting out? 

None (See *\) 

3. Explain the disposition of emplovees if thev were not laid off. 

N/A(Seesl) 

4. What percentage of Citv emplovees' time is spent on services to be contracted out? 

N/A(Seesl) 

3. How long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time or an 

ongoing request for contracting out? 

Since 1975. The current contract commenced on January I. 1998 for a 10-year period with up 
to 5 additional one-year options. 

6. What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification? Has it been certified for 
each subsequent year? 

1974-1975. Yes, it has been cenified each year since. 

7. How will the services meet the goals of your MBE.W BE Action Plan? 

AJthough this contract was not awarded to a MBE"WBE firm in 1983. it must adhere to the 
City's non-discrimination ordinance contained in Chapters 12B &. \ZC of the City's 
Administrative Code. This contract contains MBEAv'BE goais which the Contractor must meet. 

8. Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance for its 
employees? Even if not required, are health benefits provided? 

The contract does not require health insurance. However, the contractor provides health 
insurance for its employees per a labor agreement. 

9. Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so. are the 
same benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not. how does the 
proposed contractor comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? 

The contractor provides benefits to spouses and domestic partners. 



Department Representative: 

^ Duke"T3riscoe. Deputy Airpon Director - Operations 

Telephone Number: (4151 "94-5010 

H:\DWONG\WPDOCS\03163A9DW1 
Revised: 16-Mar-98 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lb - File 98-797 

Department: 

Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Sheriff 

Resolution approving the Controller's certification that 
County Jail Food Service Management operations for the 
City and County of San Francisco can continue to be 
practically performed by a private contractor at a lower 
cost for the year commencing July 1, 1998, than if work 
were performed by City and County employees. 



County Jail Food Service Management 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

In December, 1994 through a Request for Proposals (RFP) 
process, the Sheriffs Department awarded a five year 
contract to Aramark Correctional Services for the 
provision of Jail Food Service Management Services. A 
resolution approving Proposition J certification for this 
contract for the period from July 1, 1997 through June 30, 
1998 was approved by the Board of Supervisors in May, 
1997. 

The proposed resolution would approve Proposition J 
certification for Aramark Correctional Services to 
continue providing Jail Food Service Management 
Services for the period from July 1, 1998 through June 30. 
1999. Jail Food Service Management Services consist of 
the administrative oversight and provision of meals at the 
six County jails. 

The Controller has determined that contracting County 
Jail Food Service Management for FY 1998-99 would 
result in estimated savings as follows: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

5 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Citv-Ooerated Service Costs 


Lowest 
Salary 
Sterj 

$815,303 

224.696 

$1,039,999 


Highest 

Salary 

Step 


Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Total 


$965,100 

248.087 

SI. 213, 187 


Contractual Services Cost 


801.600 


801.600 


Estimated Savings 


S238.399 


$411,587 



Comments: 



1. Jail Food Service Management services were first 
certified, as required under Proposition J (Charter Section 
10.104), in 1980 and have been continuously provided by 
an outside contractor since then. 



Recommendation: 



2. The proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively approve the Controller's certification as of 
July 1, 1998. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is based on Aramark Correctional Services' 
projected FY 1998-99 costs for County Jail Food Services 
Management. 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is shown in the Attachment to 
this report. 

Amend the proposed resolution for retroactivity and 
approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Attachment 



CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

DEPARTMENT: SHERIFF 

CONTRACT SERVICES: Food Service-Aramark 

CONTRACT PERIOD: _ July I, 1998 - June 30, 1999 

(1) Who performed the activity /service prior to contracting out? 

Food service was performed by City employee's prior to 1980 including 
a Food Service Administrator, Chefs and Cooks. 

(2) How many City employees were laid off as a result of contracting out? 

5 Chefs and 1 Cook were deleted from the FY 94-95 budget by the 
Mayor's office. 

(3) Explain the disposition of employees if they were not laid cff. 

All 6 were absorbed by other departments with similar classification. It is 
my understanding the Food Service Administrator's position was vacant when 
this first went to contract. 

(4) What percentage of City employees' time is spent of services to be contracted out? 

None 

(5) Hew long have the services been contracted our? Is this likely to be a one-time or an ongoing 
request for contracting out? 

This service was contracted out in 1980 and will be an ongoing request 
for contracting out. 

(5) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification? Has it teen certified for each 
subsequent year? 
FY 1980-81 and has been certified for each subsequent year. 

(7) How wiil the services meet the goals of your MBEWBE Action Plan? 

A wavier is in effect for this contracted service. The contract is a 
highly specialized and competitively bid contract. 

(8) Dees the proposed contract require that the contractor provide hearth insurance for its employees? 
Even if not required, are health benefits provided? 

There is no contracted requirement for the contractor to provide health insurance. 
However, this contractor does provide health insurance for its employees. 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so. are the same 
benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not, how does the proposed contractor ■ 

comply with the Domestic Partners ordnance? Contractor does provide benefits to spouses of 
employees. Current contract expires in 1999. Contractor knows they must comply 
with equal benefits requirement should they request a contract modification before 
the contract expiration. Contractor has provided documentation to HRC. 
Department Representative: Sergeant Edwin James if 10 12 

_ . . ■; SA—y?-? 5 

i e.'epnone Number: 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Hom.Jlefit.r4J 



Item lc - File 98-798 



Department: 



Item: 



Sheriffs Department 



JUL o? 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Resolution concurring with the controller's certification 
that the San Francisco Own Recognizance Project (O.R.) 
for the City and County of San Francisco can continue to 
be practically be performed by private contractor at a 
lower cost for the year commencing July 1, 1998, than if 
the work were performed by City and County employees. 



Services to be 
Performed: 



Own Recognizance Project 



Description: 



Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for the 
Own Recognizance Project for FY 1998-99 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 





Lowest 


Highest 




Salary 


Salary 


Citv-Operated Service Costs 


Step 
$741,220 


Step 


Salaries 


$ 876,679 


Fringe Benefits 


198,352 


219.104 


Total 


$939,572 


$1,095,783 


Contractual Services Cost 


792,763 


792.763 


Estimated Savings 


$146,809 


$303,020 



Comments: 



1. The Own Recognizance Project interviews all persons 
arrested on non-warrant felony charges and certain 
misdemeanors that are not citable bv the Sheriffs 



B OARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee Revised, 7/6/98 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting Item lc - File 98-798 

Department, who are booked into custody and are not 
immediately bailed or cited. 

2. The Sheriffs Department reports that the O.R. Project 
was first certified under Proposition J, (Charter Section 
10.104), in FY 1977-78 and has been continuously 
contracted out by The San Francisco Institute for 
Criminal Justice since that time. 

3. The prior one-year contract with San Francisco 
Institute for Criminal Justice-O.R Project expires on June 
30, 1998. The Office of the Sheriff wishes to exercise its 
option to renew this contract. Approval of this proposed 
resolution is required before the expired contract with 
San Francisco Institute for Criminal Justice-O.R Project 
can be renewed for FY 1998-99. 

4. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is the San Francisco Institute for Criminal 
Justice-O.R. Projects' projected FY* 1998-99 cost for the 
Own Recognizance Project, which is 4.1 percent less than 
FY* 1997-98. 

5. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is attached. 

6. The proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively approve the Controller's certification as of 
July 1, 1998. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to provide for retroactivity 

and approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

9 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lc - File 98-798 

Department: 

Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Sheriffs Department 

Resolution concurring with the controller's certification 
that the San Francisco Own Recognizance Project (O.R.) 
for the City and County of San Francisco can continue to 
be practically be performed by private contractor at a 
lower cost for the year commencing July 1, 1998, than if 
the work were performed by City and County employees. 



Own Recognizance Project 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for the 
Own Recognizance Project for FY 1998-99 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 



Citv-Operated Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Total 

Contractual Services Cost 

Estimated Savings 



Lowest Highest 

Salary Salary 

Step Step 

$741,220 $ 876,679 

198.352 219.104 

$939,572 $1,095,783 

792.763 792.763 

$146.809 $303.020 



Comments: 



1. The Own Recognizance Project interviews all persons 
arrested on non-warrant felony charges and certain 
misdemeanors that are not citable bv the Sheriffs 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Department, who are booked into custody and are not 
immediately bailed or cited. 

2. The Sheriffs Department reports that the O.R. Project 
was first certified under Proposition J, (Charter Section 
10.104), in FY 1977-78 and has been continuously- 
contracted out by The San Francisco Institute for 
Criminal Justice since that time. 

3. The prior one-year contract with San Francisco 
Institute for Criminal Justice-O.R Project expires on June 
30, 1998. The Office of the Sheriff wishes to exercise its 
option to renew this contract. Approval of this proposed 
resolution is required before the expired contract with 
San Francisco Institute for Criminal Justice-O.R Project 
can be renewed for FY' 1998-99. 

4. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is the San Francisco Institute for Criminal 
Justice-O.R. Projects' projected FY* 1998-99 cost for the 
Own Recognizance Project, which is 4.1 percent less than 
FY* 1997-98. 

5. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is attached. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



ATTACHMENT 
CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 



DEPARTMENT: SHcRIFF 



San Francisco Institute For 
CONTRACT SERVICES: r ^-,- TT ,-,-^. p1 T „gr-i re - p.R. Proiect 

CONTRACT PERIOD: July I. 1998 - June 30, 1999 



(1) Who performed the acdvity/servica prior to contracting out? 
The service was not provided. 

(2) How many City employees were laid off as a result of contracting out? 
None 

(3) Explain Hie disposition of employees if they were not laid off. 
N/A 

(4) What percentage of City employees' time is spent of services to be contracted out? 
None 

(5) Hew long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time or an ongoing 
request for contracting out? 

The service was first contracted out in 1966. It is an ongoing request 
for contracting out. 

(6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certficaticn? Has it been certified for each 
subsequent year? 

FY 11 -IS and it has been certified each subsequent year. 

(7) How will the services meet the goals of your MBE'WBE Action Plan? 

This service is provided by a non-profit organization so the MBE/WBE 
is not affected. 

(3) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide hearth insurance for its employees? 

Even if not required, are health benefits provided? 

The proposed contract does not require the contractor to provide health 

insurance but the contractor does provide health insurance for its 

employees . 
(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefiis to employees with spouses? If so. are the same 

benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not, how does the proposed contractor ' 

comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? 

Contractor does provide benefits to spouses of employees and has taken 

necessary steps to comply with the domestic partners ordinance. 

Department Representative: Sergeant Edwin James #1012 

Telephone Number: 554-7225 



10 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item Id - File 98-799 

Department: 

Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Sheriffs Department 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that the Pre-Trial Diversion Project for the City and 
County of San Francisco can continue to be practically 
performed by a private contractor at a lower cost for the 
year commencing July 1, 1998, than if the work were 
performed by City and County employees. 



Pre-Trial Diversion Project 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for the 
Pre-Trial Diversion Project for FY 1998-99 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 



City-Operated Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Total 

Contractual Services Cost 

Estimated Savings 



Lowest 
Salary 
Step 


Highest 

Salary 

Step 


$508,816 

134,944 

$643,760 


$601,985 

149.591 

$751,576 


512.142 


512.142 


$131,618 


$239,434 



Comments: 



1. The Pre-Trial Diversion Project diverts selected 
misdemeanor offenders from the criminal justice system 
and places such offenders in the Pre-Trial Diversion 
Project to receive vocational training, job placement and 
counseling. The Sheriffs Department reports that this 
service was first certified as required under Proposition J, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee Revised, 7/6/98 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting Item Id - File 98-799 

(Charter Section 10.104) in FY 1977-78 and has been 
continuously provided by an outside contractor since then. 

2. The prior one-year contract with the San Francisco 
Diversion Project, the non-profit organization which 
provides the Pre-Trial Diversion Project, expires on June 
30, 1998. The Office of the Sheriff wishes to exercise its 
option to renew this contract. Approval of the proposed 
resolution is required before the expired contract with the 
San Francisco Diversion Project can be renewed for FY 
1998-99. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
thi> analysis is the San Francisco Diversion Projects' 
projected FY 1998-99 cost for the Pre-Trial Diversion 
Project. 

4. The estimated FY' 1998-99 Contractual Services Cost 
for the Pre-Trial Diversion Project of $512,142 is $360,403 
or 238 percent more than the FY 1997-98 cost of $151,739. 
The memo contained in Attachment I. provided by 
Sergeant Edwin James, from the Sheriffs Department, 
explains in detail the reasons and the necessity for a 238 
percent increase in the costs of the contract. 

5. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is shown as Attachment II. 

6. The proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively approve the Controller's certification as of 
July 1. 1998. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to provide for retroactivity 

and approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item Id -File 98-799 

Department: 

Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Sheriffs Department 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that the Pre-Trial Diversion Project for the City and 
County of San Francisco can continue to be practically 
performed by a private contractor at a lower cost for the 
year commencing July 1. 1998, than if the work were 
performed by City and County employees. 



Pre-Trial Diversion Project 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for the 
Pre-Trial Diversion Project for FY 1998-99 would result in 
estimated savings as follows: 



Citv-Operated Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 

Total 

Contractual Services Cost 

Estimated Savings 



Lowest 


Highest 


Salarv 


Salarv 


Step 


Step 


S508.816 


S601.985 


134.944 


149.591 



S643.760 S751.576 



512.142 512.142 



S131.618 $239.434 



Comments: 



1. The Pre-Trial Diversion Project diverts selected 
misdemeanor offenders from the criminal justice system 
and places such offenders in the Pre-Trial Diversion 
Project to receive vocational training, job placement and 
counseling. The Sheriffs Department reports that this 
service was first certified as required under Proposition J, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



(Charter Section 10.104) in FY 1977-78 and has been 
continuously provided by an outside contractor since then. 

2. The prior one-year contract with the San Francisco 
Diversion Project, the non-profit organization which 
provides the Pre-Trial Diversion Project, expires on June 
30, 1998. The Office of the Sheriff wishes to exercise its 
option to renew this contract. Approval of the proposed 
resolution is required before the expired contract with the 
San Francisco Diversion Project can be renewed for FY 
1998-99. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is the San Francisco Diversion Projects' 
projected FY 1998-99 cost for the Pre-Trial Diversion 
Project. 

4. The estimated FY" 1998-99 Contractual Services Cost 
for the Pre-Trial Diversion Project of $512,142 is 5360,403 
or 238 percent more than the FY' 1997-98 cost of $151,739. 
The memo contained in Attachment I, provided by 
Sergeant Edwin James, from the Sheriffs Department, 
explains in detail the reasons and the necessity for a 238 
percent increase in the costs of the contract. 

5. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is shown as Attachment II. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



City and County of San Francisco /^c3^ 



OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF 




ATTACHMENT I 
Page l or i 



iA Michael Hennessey 
SHERIFF 



(415) 554-7225 



May 29, 1998 
Ref:FS/l 98-081 

Rachel Aberbach 
Budget Analyst 
1390 Market Street 
San Francisco, CA 94102 

Dear Ms. Aberbach, 

In regards to your inquiry to the cost and duties of the PreTrial Diversion Project for Fiscal Year 
1998-99 in comparison to 97-98; 

The analysis completed for the PreTrial Diversion Project for FY 97-98 described the services 
for only one of the two components administered by this contractor. The former budget officer 
mistakenly left out the other component. The program which was outlined is known as the 
"PreTrial Diversion Program." This program consists of selected misdemeanor offenders 
(usually first time offenders) that are diverted from the traditional criminal justice system into 
alternative sentencing which includes community services,counseling, etc., 
The contractual cost for the PreTrial Diversion Program was SI 5 1,739. 

To rectify the matter, for FY 1998-99, the two components, the "PreTrial Diversion Program" 
and the "Supervised PreTrial Release Program" are now included. The Supervised PreTrial 
Release Program has been in existence for two years and is designed to allow the screening of 
arrested persons the opportunity to have their status reviewed by a magistrate and possibly 
released from custody rather than remain incarcerated in the county jail. These individuals 
cannot make bail and cannot be released on their own recognizance. Qualified workers maintain 
aggressive supervision of all participants to ensure court appearances as well as address mental 
health, substance abuse and other related circumstances of the defendant. 

The contractual cost of "PreTrial Diversion Program" and "Supervised PreTrial Release Program 
is approximately $416,000. 



633 FOLSOM STREET, ROOM 200 



SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 



FAXNL'MRER (415)554-7050 



13 



J-1998 15=54 SFSD ADMIN 4155547850 P. 03 

ATTACHMENT I 
Page 2 of 2 

OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF (CONTINUED) 



A new component added 10 the duties of the PreTnal Diversion Project is known as the "Mentor 
Court Program." This program consists of a rigorous educational developmental program 
overseen by qualified workers designed to divert youthful offenders from formal criminal 
prosecution. 

The contractual cost of the "Mentor Court Program" is approximately SI 00,000. 

Therefore, there are three programs that PreTnal Diversion Project is responsible for 
administering as contracted by the Sheriffs Department 

The contract for fiscal year 98-99 will be set up not to exceed S5 16,000. 

Please call if I may be of further assistance. 



Sincerely, 



EDUTyJAMES, SERGEANT 
Financial Services Manager 



Page 2 of 2 
14 



TOTAL P. 03 



F ; 



ATTACHMENT II 



CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

DEPARTMENT: SHERIFF 

San Francisco 
CONTRACT SERVICES: p-„_-r,--- ~i nivcr^'m Project 

CONTRACT PERIOD: Jul Y *> L998 " June 30 ' 19 " 



(1) Who performed the activity/service prior to contracting out? 

This service was initially . funded through Federal Grant monies and 
service workers performed the duties. 

(2) How many City employees were laid off as a result of contracting out? 
None 

(3) Explain the disposition of employees if they were not laid cff. 
N/A 

(4) What percentage of City employees' time is spent of services to be contracted out? 
None 

(5) Hew long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time or an ongoing 
request for contracting out? 

This service was first contacted out in 1977 and is an ongoing request. 

(5) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification? Has ft been cerufted for each 
subsequent year? 

FY 1977-78 and has been certified for each subsequent year. 

(7) How will the services meet the goals of your MBE'W3E Action Plan? 

The service is provided by a non-profit organization so MBE/WBE plan 
is not effected. 

(8) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide hearth insurance for its employees? 
Even if not required, are health benefits provided? 

The proposed contract does not require contractor to provide health insurance 
but the contractor does provide health insurance for its employees. 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so. are the same 
benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not, how does the proposed contractor ■ 
comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? 

Contractor does provide benefits to spouses of employees and has taken 
necessary steps to comply with the domestic partners ordinance. 

Department Representative. Sergeant Edwin James 01012 

Telephone Number 554-7225 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item le - File 98-848 



Department: 
Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 



Airport 

Resolution concurring with the Controllers certification 
that parking management services for the San Francisco 
International Airport can continue to practically be 
performed by private contractor at a lower cost for the 
year commencing July 1, 1998 than if work were 
performed by City and County employees. 



Parking Management Services 



Description: 



Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees, if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for 
parking management services for the San Francisco 
International Airport for FY 1998-99 would result in the 
estimated savings as follows: 



Citv-Operated Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Operating Costs 
Total 

Contractual Services Costs 



Low 


High 


Salarv 


Salarv 


Step 


Step 



$11,363,235 $13,345,744 
3,086,641 3,382,518 
2.000.764 2.000.764 

$16,450,640 $18,729,026 

13.267.205 13.267.205 



Estimated Savings 



$3.183.435 $5.461.821 



Comment: 



1. Parking management services for the Airport include 
the management of parking and taxicab operations, 
security guard services, janitorial services, and services 
associated with master plan construction and starting up 
a new parking facility. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



16 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

2. Parking management services for the Airport have 
been contracted out since 1971, the first year that these 
services were provided. 

3. The prior one-year contract with AMPCO System 
Parking expired on June 30, 1998. The Airport wishes to 
exercise its option to renew this contract for one year. 
The proposed new contract was scheduled to begin on July 
1, 1998. As such, the proposed resolution should be 
amended for retroactivity. 

4. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is AMPCO's projected FY 1998-99 cost for 
parking management services. 

5. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is attached. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution for retroactivity and 

approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Attachment 



CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

Department: Airport Commission 

Contract Services: Public Automobile Parking 

Contract Period: July 1 . 1 998 to June 30. 1 999 

1. Who performed the activity/service prior to contracting out? 

Tnis service has always been contracted out. it has never been operated by City personnel. 

2. How many City employees were laid off as a result of contracting out? 
None 

3. Eiplain the disposition of emplovees if they were not laid off. 

N/A 

4. What percentage of Citv emplovees' time is spent on services to be contracted out? 

N/A 

5. How long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time or an 
ongoing request for contracting out? 

Services have been contracted out since October 16. 1971. it is likely to remain contracted out. 

6. What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J certification? Has it been certified for 
each subsequent year? 

It has been certified each year since 1980. 

Yes, it has been certified each year since Fiscal Year 1980/8 1 . 

7. How will the services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE Action Plan? 

Although this contract was not awarded to a MBE/WBE firm in 1995. it must adhere to the 
City's non-discrimination ordinance contained in Chapters 12B & 12C of the City's 
Administrative Code. This contract contains MBE/WBE goals which inciude "best effort to 
raest a 50% goal. 

8. Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance for its 
employees? Even if not required, are health benefits provided? 

Tne contractor provides health insurance for its employees through union agreements. 

9. Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? If so. are the 
same benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not. how does the 
proposed contractor comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? 

AMPCO and parent ABMI are working on a nation-wide Domestic Partners Program. Tnis 
contract is unchanged and the reauirement was not included in the contract. 



Department Representative: 




cariscoe. Deoutv Airnort Director - Ooerations 



Telephone Number: (650)794-5010 



04106a.dcf 
Revised: 16-Mar-98 



18 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Juh T 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item If - File 98-945 

Department: 

Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 



Description: 



Administrative Sendees 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that convention facilities management, operation and 
maintenance services can be practically performed at Bill 
Graham Civic Auditorium and Moscone Center by private 
contractor at a lower cost than similar work services 
performed by City and County employees. 



Convention facilities 
maintenance 



management, operation and 



In July, 1995, the Administrative Services Department 
renewed an existing contract with Moscone Joint Venture 
for a four year period for the provision of convention 
facilities management, operations and maintenance 
services at the Bill Graham Civic Auditorium and 
Moscone Center. A resolution for the Proposition J 
certification for this contract for the period July 1, 1997 
through June 30, 1998 was approved by the Board of 
Supervisors in July of 1997. The proposed resolution 
would approve the Proposition J certification for Moscone 
Joint Venture to continue providing convention facilities 
management, operations and maintenance services at the 
Bill Graham Civic Auditorium and Moscone Center for 
the period from July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999. 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for 
convention facilities management, operations and 
maintenance services at the Bill Graham Civic 
Auditorium and Moscone Center for FY 1998-99 would 
result in the estimated savings as follows: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Citv-Operated Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Total 



Lowest 


Highest 


Salary 


Salary 


Step 


Step 



$8,352,736 $9,815,426 

2.216.449 2.444.316 

$10,569,185 $12,259,742 



Contractual Services Cost 10.162.532 10.162.532 



Estimated Savings 



$406.653 $2.097.210 



Comment: 



Recommendation: 



1. Convention facilities management, operation and 
maintenance services at Bill Graham Civic Auditorium 
and Moscone Center were first certified, as required by 
Charter Section 10.104, in 1981 and have been 
continuously provided by an outside contractor since then. 

2. The proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively approve the Controller's certification as of 
July 1, 1998. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is the Moscone Joint Venture's projected FY 
1998-99 costs for convention facilities management, 
operation and maintenance. 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is shown in the Attachment to 
this report. 

Amend the proposed resolution for retroactivity and 
approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Attachmeht 



CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

DEPARTMENT: San Francisco Convention Facilities . 
CONTRACT SERVICES: Operations 



CONTRACT PERIOD: July 1, 1998 - June 30, 1999 

(1) Who performed the activity/service poor to contracting out? 

City 

(2) How many City employees were laid off as a result of contracting out? 

None 

(3) Explain the disposition of employes a they were not isid off. 

Employees went to worlc for the contractor. 

(4) What percentage of City employees' time is spent of services to be contracted out? 

or 

(5) Hew long have the services been corrtracied out? b this Okely to be a ooe-tiroe or an ongoing 
request for contracting our? 

17 Years 

(6) What was the first fiscal yearfcr a Reposition J certrncalion? Hes it been certified for each 
subsequent year? 

1982 - 1983. Yes. 

(J) How will the SQr/ees meet the gcais of ycurMBE/WBE Action Plan? 

Contractor is a joint venture with a minority principal.. 

(5) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide hearth insurance for its employees? 
Even If not required, are health benefits provided? 

Yes. 

(S) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees 'with spouses? If so, ara the same 
benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If net how does the proposed contractDr 
comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance? 

Yes 

Department Representative: Jack Moerschbaecher 

Telephone Number 556-6178 



21 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item lg - File 98-922 



Department: 



Item: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $93,870 for emergency repair work to replace 
the structurally inadequate sewer on Hattie Street from 
Market Street to Corbett Street. 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



$93,870 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on October 
14, 1997 the sewer located on Hattie Street from Market 
Street to Corbett Street had failed and immediate repairs 
were required in order to protect the health, welfare and 
property of the Citizens of San Francisco. The PUC 
declared an emergency on October 14, 1997. In accordance 
with Section 6.30 of the Administrative Code, the PUC 
initiated expedited contract proceedings and the PUC 
awarded a contract to the low bidder, Harty Pipelines, 
Inc. in the amount of $69,750. 



Budget: 



Comment: 



The total estimated project cost is $93,870 including 
$69,720 for construction work and $24,150 for DPW costs. 

1. Mr. Norman Chan of the DPW, advises that the 
following construction bids were received from two firms 
on October 17, 1997: 



Name of bidder 
Harty Pipelines, Inc. 
A Ruiz Construction Co. 



Amount of Bid 

$69,750 

74,141 



2. Mr. Chan advises that due to changed equipment 
requirements, the final payment to Harty Pipelines, Inc. 
was $69,720 or $30 less than the bid amount of $69,750. 

3. Mr. Chan reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on October 27, 1997 and was completed on 
November 10, 1997. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



4. Mr. Chan advises that due to various delays in 
receiving expenditure documentation from Harty 
Pipelines, Inc, the PUC is requesting approval of this 
proposed resolution approximately seven months after the 
construction work was completed. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item lh - File 98-923 



Department: 



Item: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $164,164 for emergency repair work to replace 
the structurally inadequate sewer on Douglass Street 
from 24th Street to 25th Street. 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



$164,164 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on 
November 12, 1997 the sewer located on Douglass Street 
from 24th Street to 25th Street had failed and immediate 
repairs were required in order to protect the health, 
welfare and property of the Citizens of San Francisco. 
The PUC declared an emergency on November 12, 1997. 
In accordance with Section 6.30 of the Administrative 
Code, the PUC initiated expedited contract proceedings 
and the PUC awarded a contract to the low bidder, Shaw 
Pipeline, Inc. in the amount of $138,974. 

The total estimated project cost is $164,164 including 
$127,164 for construction work and $37,000 for DPW 
costs. 



Comment: 



1. Mr. Norman Chan of the DPW, advises that the 
following construction bids were received from seven 

firms on November 13, 1997: 



Name of Bidder Amount of Bid 

Shaw Pipeline, Inc. $138,974 

JMB Construction Inc. 149,085 

Harty Pipelines, Inc. 157,600 

KJ W'oods Construction Co. Inc. 154,000 

Uniacke Construction Inc. 169,330 

Darcy & Harty Construction 178,320 

A Ruiz Construction Co. 250,551 

2. Mr. Chan advises that various bid items were deleted 
from the contract. Therefore the final payment to Shaw 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Pipeline, Inc. was $127,164 or $11,810 less than the bid 
amount of $138,974. 

3. Mr. Chan reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on November 14, 1997 and was completed on 
December 19, 1997. 

4. Mr. Chan advises that due to various delays in 
receiving expenditure documentation from Shaw Pipeline, 
Inc., the PUC is requesting approval of this proposed 
resolution approximately six months after the 
construction work was completed. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

25 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items 2 and 3 - Files 98-934 and 98-935 

Note: The Department of Human Services (DHS) advises that it will submit an 
Amendment of the Whole to the Finance Committee for each of the subject 
items. This report is based upon the amended legislation. 



Department: 
Item: 



Department of Human Services (DHS) 

Item 2, File 98-934: Resolution approving a contract 
between the Cuy and Addus HealthCare for the provision of 
In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) for the three j^ear 
period from August 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001, with an option 
to renew for one additional year, in the amount of 
$14,888,844. 

Item 3, File 98-935: Resolution approving a contract 
between the City and the IHSS Consortium of San Francisco 
for the provision of IHSS for the period from August 1, 1998 
to June 30, 2001, with an option to renew for one additional 
year, in the amount of $16,132,813. 



Contract Amounts: 



Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Addus HealthCare 
IHSS Consortium 
Total 



$14,888,844 

16.132.813 

$31,021,657 



General Fund monies included in DHS's FY 
1998-99 budget and to be included in the FY 
1999-2000 and FY 2000-2001 budgets $ 9,306,497 

Federal and State Medicaid Funds included in 
DHS's FY 1998-99 budget and to be included in 
the FY 1999-2000 and FY 2000-2001 budgets 21,715.160 
Total $31,021,657 

In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) is an entitlement 
program which provides funding for low-income seniors and 
disabled people to receive non-medical personal care and 
other household assistance in their homes from visiting 
workers. IHSS care can allow seniors and disabled persons 
to remain in their own homes and thereby avoid unnecessary 
and expensive hospitalization or institutionalization. 

IHSS workers function either as (a) independent providers; 
(b) through a contract between DHS and the IHSS 
Consortium, which consists of non-profit providers of 
services; or (c) through a contract between DHS and Addus 
HealthCare, a private provider of services. The total annual 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



IHSS hours provided by these three IHSS providers is 
approximately 7,270,000. Under the proposed contracts, the 
total annual IHSS hours of 7,270,000 would be distributed as 
follows: (a) independent providers - approximately 90 
percent, or 6,520,000 hours; (b) IHSS Consortium - 
approximately five percent or 375,000 hours; and (c) Addus 
HealthCare - approximately five percent or 375,000 hours. 

In 1994 the Board of Supervisors approved two contracts for 
IHSS services, one with the IHSS Consortium and one with 
Addus HealthCare, for the period from July 1, 1994 to June 
30, 1997, with an option to renew for one year (Resolution 
688-94). According to Ms. Julie Murray Brenman of DHS, a 
one month extension of the two contracts, to July 31, 1998, 
was approved by the Human Services Commission on June 
25, 1998, due to a delay in receiving contract rate approval 
by the State. The proposed resolutions would authorize new 
contracts with the IHSS Consortium (File 98-935) and Addus 
HealthCare (File 98-934) for the period from August 1, 1998 
to June 30, 2001, with an option to renew for one additional 
year. 

Under the proposed contracts, IHSS Consortium and Addus 
HealthCare contract employees will receive health and other 
benefits as well as sick, vacation, and holiday benefits. The 
following table shows the proposed hourly rates, estimated 
number of hours and estimated total amount to be paid to 
each of the contractors. The hourly rates include wages paid 
to IHSS workers, benefits, training, travel, insurance and 
administrative costs. 

Addus HealthCare IHSS Consortium 



FY 1998-99 






Hourly rate 


$13.5878 


$14.75 


Estimated # of hours* 


343,750 


343.750 


Total amount 


$4,670,806 


$5,070,313 


FY 1999-2000 






Hourly rate 


$13.6235 


S14.75 


Estimated £ of hours 


375,000 


375.000 


Total amount 


$5,108,813 


$5,531,250 


FY 2000-01 






Hourly rate 


$13.6246 


$14.75 


Estimated # of hours 


375,000 


375,000 


Total amount 


$5,109,225 


S5, 531, 250 



This represents prorated hours for the 11-month period from August 1. 1998 through 
June 30, 1999 (based on the annualized amount of 375,000 hours). 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Jul}' 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

The proposed FY 1998-99 hourly rate of $13.5878 for Addus 
HealthCare is $0.1522 per hour lower, or a 1.1 percent 
decrease, over the FY 1997-98 rate of $13.74. The proposed 
FY 1998-99 hourly rate of $14.75 for the IHSS Consortium is 
$1.01 higher, or a 7.4 percent increase over the FY 1997-98 
rate of $13.74. According to Ms. Brenman, these changes in 
the FY 1998-99 hourly rates are due to a redistribution of 
hours between the two contractors. Ms. Brenman advises 
that, under the current contracts, the IHSS Consortium 
provides 150,000 hours of services and Addus HealthCare 
provides 600,000 hours of services. Under the proposed 
contracts, the IHSS Consortium and Addus HealthCare 
would each provide 343,750 hours of services in FY 1998-99 
(375,000 hours on an annualized basis). As a result of the 
relative increase in the number of hours required under the 
IHSS Consortium contract, Addus HealthCare employees 
(who are paid at a higher rate than IHSS Consortium 
employees) are being shifted to the IHSS Consortium 
contract, thereby resulting in a higher hourly rate for IHSS 
Consortium and a lower hourly rate for Addus HealthCare. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Anthony Nicco of DHS advises that, in February of 

1998, DHS issued two separate request for proposals (RFPs) 
for the subject IHSS services, one for non-profit service 
providers and one for private and other providers. According 
to Mr. Nicco, only one firm, the IHSS Consortium, responded 
to the RFP for non-profits. DHS received two responses to 
the RFP for private and other providers. Mr. Nicco reports 
that Addus HealthCare submitted a bid of $13.61 per hour. 
Although another firm, AJC Services, submitted a lower bid 
of $13.56 per hour, AJC Services' proposal received a lower 
overall score from an independent review panel than Addus 
HealthCare's proposal, according to Mr. Nicco. Mr. Nicco 
advises that Addus Health Care's hourly rate of $13.61 
represents the composite rate over the three year period of 
the contract. 

2. The contract with Addus HealthCare specifies that it 
shall not exceed a maximum amount of $14,888,844 over the 
three year period of the contract. The contract with the IHSS 
Consortium specifies that it will not exceed $16,132,813 over 
the three year period of the contract. 

3. Mr. Nicco advises that the funding to provide health care 
benefits to IHSS workers contained in the Mayor's proposed 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

FY 1998-99 budget is for independent IHSS workers only. 
IHSS workers employed under contract with Addus 
HealthCare and the IHSS Consortium receive health care 
benefits provided by those employers. Similarly, the hourly 
wage increase from $6.65 to $7.00 per hour, proposed by the 
Finance Committee in the FY 1998-99 budget, is for 
independent IHSS workers only. Mr. Nicco reports that 
wage rates for IHSS workers employed under contract with 
Addus HealthCare and the IHSS Consortium are set through 
separate union negotiations. 

Recommendation: Based on the representations of DHS that only one firm, the 
IHSS Consortium, responded to the RFP for nonprofit 
providers and that Addus Health Care received the highest 
overall score among the private providers, approve the 
proposed resolutions. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 4 -File 98-1089 

Department: California Academy of Sciences 

Item: Ordinance calling and providing for a special election to 

be held in the City and County of San Francisco on 
Tuesday, November 3, 1998 for the purpose of submitting 
to the voters a proposition to incur bonded indebtedness of 
the City and County in the amount of $79,880,000 for the 
acquisition, rehabilitation, renovation, improvement, 
construction or reconstruction by the City and County of 
San Francisco of the California Academy of Sciences, and 
all other works, propert}' and structures necessary or 
convenient for the foregoing purposes; finding that the 
estimated cost of $79,880,000 for the publicly-funded 
portion of the project is and will be too great to be paid 
out of the ordinary annual income and revenue of the City 
and County and will require the incurring of bonded 
indebtedness; and specifying other requirements and 
procedures related to the special election. 

Description: The State General Obligation Bond Law requires that, in 

order for the City to issue General Obligation Bonds, a 
resolution of public convenience and necessity must first 
be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the Board of 
Supervisors, and the proposed bonds must then be 
approved by two-thirds of the electorate. On June 22, 
1998, the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution 
declaring that the public interest and necessity demand 
improvements to the California Academy of Sciences by 
the City and County (File 98-818). 

The proposed ordinance would provide for a special 
election to be held and consolidated with the Consolidated 
Municipal Election already scheduled for November 3, 
1998 in order to submit to the voters a proposition to 
incur bonded indebtedness of the City and County, in the 
principal amount of $79,880,000, for improvements to the 
California Academy of Sciences. 

Financing for a renovated and expanded 414,503 square 
foot Academy of Sciences facility (the existing facility is 
378,443 square feet) at an estimated total cost of 
$129,432,000 would be funded (a) by the subject proposed 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

$79,880,000 in General Obligation Bonds to be authorized 
by the electorate and (b) private financing in the amount 
of $49,552,000 to be raised by the California Academy of 
Sciences Trustees under a public/private partnership 
between the City and the California Academy of Sciences 
Trustees. The Academy facility would be renovated and 
expanded at the same Golden Gate Park location. 

Budget: A summary budget for the $79,880,000 estimated project 

budget for the publicly funded General Obligation Bond 
portion of the new California Academy of Sciences is as 
follows: 

General Construction $62,606,000 

Hazardous Materials Mitigation 1,000,000 

Fees and Permits 13,022,000 

Relocation 1,050,000 

Telecommunications/Security 950,000 

Art Enrichment 1.252.000 

Total Project Budget $79,880,000 

The Attachment to this report is a budget, provided by the 
California Academy of Sciences, showing the $79,880,000 
to be publicly funded with General Obligation Bonds, and 
the $49,552,000 to be funded from private sources, for a 
total project cost of $129,432,000. 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Sarah Hollenbeck of the Mayor's 

Office of Public Finance, the City Charter provides for a 
legal debt limit of 3 percent of net assessed property 
value. The Mayor's Office of Public Finance has calculated 
the City's Debt Limit Ratio as follows: 

Total Debt Limit at 7/1/98 $1,757,867,490 
Outstanding General Obligation 

Bonds at 1/1/98 839.865.000 

Remaining General Obligation Capacity S91S.002.490 

If the bond issue of S79,880,000 proposed for the 
November 1998 ballot were to be approved by voters, the 
remaining General Obligation bonding capacity would be 
$838,122,490. However, the amount of debt that could be 
issued in any given year is partly a function of the level of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

payments on existing debt, which fluctuates as older bond 
issues are retired and new bonds are issued. 

2. According to Ms. Monique Moyer of the Mayor's Office 
of Public Finance, assuming the bonds are issued in an 
interest environment which reflects the norms for the 
past ten years, the Academy bonds would bear a true 
interest cost of 5.81 percent. Upon issuance of the entire 
$79,880,000, average annual debt service would be 
approximately $7,185,783 and total debt service would be 
$136,744,354 for the proposed 20 year bond period. 

Ms. Moyer reports that if the bonds were issued at this 
time, the true interest cost would be approximately 5.29 
percent, average annual debt service would be 
approximately $6,531,608, and total debt service would be 
$130,341,865 for the proposed 20 year bond period. 

3. According to Mr. John Madden of the Controller's 
Office, if $79,880,000 in bonds were to be issued, the 
bonds would result in an increase in the Property Tax 
rate of approximately $0.0127 per $100 of assessed value. 
At this rate, the owner of a single family residence 
assessed at $400,000 would pay $49.97 in additional 
annual Property Taxes beginning in FY1999-2000. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Proposed Public Project Budge: 
Seismic Renovation and Code Compliance 



Attachment 
Pase 1 of 2 



General Construction Cost in Thousands 



3ond 


Other 


Total 


Funded 


Funded 


Cost 


Cost 


Cost 





1.0 Earthwork and Demolition 

2.0 Building Shell 
Foundations 
Substructure 
Superstructure 
Architectural Finishes 
Mechanical Systems 
Electrical Systems 
Site Utilities 

Total 2.0 3uildmg Shell 



S2.0S3 



SO 



$2 .093 



SS84 


s 


S534 


4.551 





4.55". 


8.738 





8,738 


7.801 





I 


5,408 





5.408 


3.016 





3,016 


150 





150 



S30.349 



SO S30.349 



3.0 Specs! Finishes 

Tank Protective Coatings 
Acrylic Viewing Windows 

Total 3.0 Special Finishes 



S£3 




SS3 



SO 





sc 



S£3 




S53 



4.0 Specialized Equipment 
Life Support Systems 
Hoists 
Group t Equipment 

Total 4.0 Specialized Equipment 



S280 


SO 


S280 











1.875 


'J 


1.87S 



S2.155 



r 



S2.155 



50 Sitework 

Service/Corporation Yard Repairs 
Terraces and Entries 
Sitework Repairs 

Total 5.0 Sitework 



S728 


SO 


692 





400 






S1.820 



SC 



S728 
6S2 
400 



S1.820 



Subtotal 

General Conditions 
Contractor's Ovemead & Profit 

Subtotal 

6.0 Exhibitry 

Subtotal 

Scope Development Contingency 

Subtotal 

Construction Contncency 
Escalation 

Total Construction Cost in Thousands 



S35.4S0 



so s: 



4.195 





4.195 


1 .527 





1.527 


S42.302 


SO 


S42.3C2 


SO 


S22.057 


S22.0S7 


542.302 


S22.057 


S54.369 


4.230 


2.207 


5,437 


S46.532 


S24.274 


570.806 


4,553 


2.427 


7.081 


11.421 


5.8S0 


$17,280 



52.506 S22.5; 



S95.157 



33 



Attachment 
Page 2 of 2 



Project Cost in i nousands 



Bond Other 

Funded Funded 

Cost Cost 



Total 
Cost 



Total Construction Cost in Thousands (from Page 1) 



S62.606 S32.561 595,157 



Other Project Costs in Thousands 
7.0 Hazardous Materials Mitigation Cost 

8.0 Permits & Fees 

. Review of Existing E1R 
Professional Dssign Fees 
Exhib'rt/FF&E Design Fees 
Project & Construction Management Fees 
Civil & Geotechnica! Engineering 

Hazmat Mitigation Design Fees 

Security & MIS Consultants 

Permits & Plan Check Fees 

Inspections & Testing 

Owner's Insurance & Performance Bonds 

Utility Fees 

City Agency Fees 

3ond Legal S. Financing 

General Project Legal Fees 

Inhouse Facilities Engineering 

Subtotal 8.0 Permits & Fees 

9.0 Temporary Relocation & Moving 

10.0 FF&E 

11.0 Telecommunications & Security Systems 

12.0 Art Enrichment 

Total Other Project Costs 

Totaf Project Cost 



$1,000 



SO 



S1.000 



SI 60 


so 


S160 


7,513 





7.513 





7.918 


7.918 





4,523 


4.623 


170 


100 


270 


35 





35 


50 





50 


800 





800 


1.000 





1.000 


814 





814 


250 





250 


600 





600 


1.630 





1.630 





250 


250 





50 


50 



$13,022 S12.941 S25.953 

51.050 SO Si. 050 

SO $4,000 S4.000 

S950 S50 S1.000 

S1.252 SO 51,252 

$17,274 $16,991 $34,255 

S79.880 S49.S52 S129.432 



-u 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 5 - File 98-929 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Department of Human Resources (DHR) 
Recreation and Park Department 

Ordinance authorizing the settlement of a grievance of 
Mr. Ron Perez for Acting Assignment Pay filed against 
the City pursuant to the Memoranda of Understanding 
(MOU) between the International Brotherhood of 
Electrical Workers (IBEW), Local 6, in the amount of 
$13,351.40 

The proposed ordinance would approve a settlement 
against the City in the amount of $13,351.40 for a 
grievance filed on behalf of Mr. Ron Perez by the 
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 6. 

According to Ms. Paula Schiff, of Employee Relations 
Division of the Department of Human Resources, Mr. 
Perez, a 7510 Lighting Fixture Maintenance Worker, 
working for the Recreation and Park Department (RPD), 
was performing the duties of a 7345 Electrician for the 
period March 10, 1997 through October 31, 1997. Ms. 
Schiff advises that Mr. Perez was directed by his 
Supervisor to perform the duties of a 7345 Electrician due 
to a shortage of staff. As a result, a request was made by 
the Recreation and Park Department to the Department 
of Human Resources (DHR) to authorize Acting 
Assignment Pay for Mr. Perez. However, the Department 
of Human Resources denied the request for the reasons 
stated in the attached Jury 8, 1997 DHR memorandum, 
(Attachment I). 

Section III.E.9 of the MOU between IBEW, Local 6 and 
the City states that, "Employees assigned by the 
Department Head or designee to perform a substantial 
portion of the duties and responsibilities of a higher 
classification shall receive compensation at a higher 
salary if all of the following conditions are met: 1) the 
assignment shall be in writing, 2) the position to which 
the employee is assigned must be a budgeted position, 
and 3) the emplo3 r ee is assigned to perform the duties of a 
higher classification for longer than ten consecutive 
working days or eighty hours, whichever is greater. An 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



employee who believes he/she is performing a substantial 
portion of the duties and responsibilities of a higher 
classification, even though one or more of the above- 
stated conditions are not met, shall be entitled to file a 
claim for out-of-class pay with the department head. 
Denials for acting assignment pay shall be subject to the 
grievance procedure." 

On behalf of Mr. Perez, IBEW Local 6 filed a grievance 
against the City on August 5, 1997 asserting violation of 
Section III.E.9 of the MOU between the IBEW and the 
City based on the City's denial of Acting Assignment Pay 
for Mr. Perez. 



Comments: 



According to Ms. Schiff, based on the grievance filed by 
IBEW, DHR decided that Mr. Perez should be paid the 
higher level salary at classification 7345 Electrician, for 
the period of March 10, 1997, through October 31, 1997, 
for Acting Assignment Pay, because Mr. Perez was 
performing the duties of a7345 Electrician. Attachment II 
is a memo from DHR explaining why DHR approved the 
grievance after its prior written decision of July 8, 1997 to 
deny the Acting Assignment Pay request of Mr. Perez. 

1. Ms. Cindy Monroe of the Recreation and Park 
Department advised that the original calculation of 
$13,351.40 for the acting assignment pay is in error and 
that the correct amount is $10,789.29. 



Recommendations: 



2. Ms. Vicki Clayton of the City Attorney's Office advises 
that if the Board of Supervisors does not approve the 
proposed ordinance, the dispute would be decided by an 
arbitrator. 

1. Amend the proposed ordinance to authorize the correct 
amount of acting assignment pay of $10,789.29 instead of 
$13,351.40 

2. Approval of the proposed ordinance, as amended, is a 
policy decision for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



ATTACHMENT T 
FROM*: REC-PPRK PERSONNEL PHONE NO. : 415 631 2093 Jun. 30 1993 B2 :04PM Pi 

City and County of San Francisco /$£^ Department of Human Resourc 




es 



ANDREA R. GOURDIN= 
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR 



July g, 1997 

Ms. Cindy Monroe 

Senior Departmental Personnel Officer 

Recreation &. Park Department 

Sttnyan &. Fell Streets 

San Francisco, CA 94 II 7 

R£: ACTING ASSIGN MENT PaV - RON PEREZ 

Dear Ms. Monroe: 



This is in response to your request for Acting Assignment Pay for Ron Perez, class 75 1 T ;«AtJ„«, 
Wooers ST^ ^^ ** ctesrification * represented by Internarionai sSherhood t of EleScal 

Staff reviewed the Acting Assignment Request Form and the Fiscal Year 1 996-97 Budged 
positions Level Chart. In reviewing the eligibility requirement conditions in accordance with the annlicah^ 
provision of the BEW, Local 6 Memorandum of Understanding, Article m.E.7. - Acting S? 
indicates ... An employee assigned ... shall receive compensation at a higher salary jfaj] JZ X 

wTv7 ""^gyaiM C 1) ^ assignment shall be in wriung, 2) The position^ wnlctml 
rf?SS ^ ^ S1 - mUST ** a budgWed P0sitl '° n ' and 3) ^ era P lQ y« * assisned to perform the duti-s 
fa £«? daSSmC2U0n f0r l0 °S er *« ■« 0°) consecutive working days or eighty (80) hou^fccSver 

J^S fi^w" th£ fol . lowL ^ : ^ e Fisc ^ Year 1996-97 Budgeted Positions Level Chart Report indicates 
our (4) mil time positions in class 7345 Electrician budgeted at Recreation & Park Deoartm^nT S 
these positions are the v,ce budgeted position. Although the request appears necessitated due to 
unaerstartmg, the circumstances do not meet the eligibility requirements and criteria for Acrin- 
Assignment Pay m accordance with the BEW, Local 6, Memorandum of Understanding Tn-r-fo-e die 
Actmg Assignment Pay request for Ron Perez, 7510 Lighting Fixture Maintenance Worker fa denied. 

C I v" y °ri t i aVC r any questions - co n c sni<; or need further guidance regarding this matter please contact 
uaroie van Dyke of the Compensation unit staff of the Employee Relations Division at 557-4869. 

Very truiy voups, 




Janet Bosnich-Seijas 
Compensation Manager 
Employee Relations Division 




BS/CVD/vd 

c: Marilyn Revcrente, Principal Pavroll/Pcrsonnel Clerk; R&? 

?PSD/Contxoller's Office 

File 



£4 Gough Street • San Francisco. CA 94103-1233 



k3(/&£L/^o 1J.11 



flLLOV 



City and County of San Francisco 




Department of Human Resources 



ANDREA R GOURDJNE 
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR 



DATE: 
TO: 

PROM: 

RE: 



MEMORANDUM 

Via Facsimile 
I 

July 2, 1998 

Harvey M. Rose 
Budget Analyst 

Paula Schiff 

Princ'pal Employee Relations Representative 

DHR Approval of the Ron Perez Grievance Settlement 





The following will explain why the Department of Human Resources denied the 
Acting Assignment Pay request from the Recreation and Park Department for Mr. 
Perez when the request was made through its Compensation Division, but later 
approved the request when the matter was presented to the Employee Relations 
Division as a settlement to a grievance. 

Administratively, the request for Acting Assignment Pay must satisfy all the 
requisite criteria. In this case, the departmental request for Acting Assignment 
Pay did not meet all the criteria. The criteria requires a vacant approved position 
in the class to which assigned. There was no vacant budgeted 7345, Electncian, 
position to which the employee could have been assigned. DHR had no 
authority to authorize the position and the request for Acting Assignment Pay 
was denied. 

. 
Pursuant to the MOU, the employee may appeal the denial of Acting Assignment 
Pay through the grievance procedure. Under this process, Acting Assignment 
Pay may be granted even if one or more of the criteria are not met. According to 
the Recreation and Park Department, Mr. Perez was assigned to perform the 
duties of a 7345, Electrician, from March 10, 1997 through October 31, 1997. 
Under this standard Mr. Perez' claim for Acting Assignment Pay can be 
authorized. 

DHR, therefore, approved Recreation and Park Department's proposed 
settlement of this claim rather than advance the matter to arbitration. 

In summary, there are two different standards for addressing Acting Assignment 
Pay claims, one administrative and one contractual. This claim failed to satisfy 
the more rigorous administrative standard, but met the more lenient contractual 
standard. 



*4 Gough Stnxrt • San Francitco, CA 84103-1213 



38 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Julv 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 6 - File 98-890 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) 

Ordinance amending Article 12, Chapter XI, Part II of the 
Municipal Code (Traffic Code) by amending Section 202. C 
thereto, providing for an increase in contractor permit 
fees. 

Pursuant to Article 12, Chapter XI, Part II of the Traffic 
Code, upon written application, the Director of Parking 
and Traffic may issue annual nontransferable parking 
permits to licensed contractors (no more than eight such 
parking permits per licensed contractor, with some 
exceptions) for display upon motor vehicles used in the 
course of construction services, pest control services, and 
construction jobbing work (trades such as plumbers or 
electricians) within a parking meter zone. Such permits 
shall be issued for a period of 12 consecutive months that 
begin, in any calendar year, on June 1 st , and any vehicle 
displaying such a parking permit may be parked in a 
parking meter zone without the deposit of coins in the 
applicable meter. 

Currently, the fee for such a parking permit is $255 if 
purchased in the first six months of the permit year and 
$175 if purchased in the last six months of the permit 



Comment: 



The proposed resolution would increase the fee for 
nontransferable parking permits to licensed contractors to 
be used for construction services, pest control services, 
and construction jobbing work. The fee for a parking 
permit purchased in the first six months of the permit 
year would be increased by $70, from $255 to $325, or 
approximately 27%, and the fee for a permit purchased in 
the last six months of the permit year would be increased 
by $50, from $175 to $225, or approximately 29%. 

1. According to Ms. Kathryn Hile of DPT, the 
Department expects to issue 1,847 such nontransferable 
parking permits to contractors in FY 1997-98, with total 
fees of $462,119 collected by DPT. Under the proposed 
ordinance, in FY 1998-99, DPT estimates that based on 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

issuance of 1,847 permits, the same number of 
nontransferable permits issued to licensed contractors in 
FY 1997-98, DPT would realize an estimated $589,193 in 
fees, or an increase of $127,074 over FY 1997-98. 

2. Ms. Hile notes that the last time the fees for such 
nontransferable parking permits issued to contractors 
increased was 1992. 

3. The increased revenue to be realized by the proposed 
ordinance was included in DPT's FY 1998-99 budget. 

Recommendation: Based on the Finance Committee's approval of the DPT 

FY 1998-99 budget, approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

40 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 7 - File 98-891 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



REVISED June 6, 1998 

Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) 

Ordinance amending Article 15, Chapter XI, Part II of the 
San Francisco Municipal Code (Traffic Code) by amending 
Section 314 thereto, providing for residential parking 
permit fees. 

The proposed legislation would increase fees for 
residential parking permits by $6 or 28.6 percent, from 
$21 to $27, if purchased in the first six months of the 
permit year, and by $3 or 28.6 percent, from $10.50 to 
$13.50, if purchased in the last six months of the permit 
vear. 



The proposed legislation would also increase the permit 
fee for rental vehicles parked in a residential parking 
permit area by $5 or $100 percent, from $5 to $10. The fee 
for a temporary visitors permit, for vehicles registered 
outside the residential parking permit area, which may be 
issued for a maximum period of eight weeks, would be 
increased by $5 or 100 percent, from $5 to $10 for each 
consecutive two-week period. 

The proposed legislation would also increase the annual 
fee for commercial parking permits, by $7 or 25 percent, 
from $28 to $35 for each permit if purchased during the 
first six months of the permit year and by $1 or 6.1 
percent, from $16.50 to $17.50 if purchased during the 
last six months of the permit year. 

Currently, $4 of the fee, for each of the parking permits 
for residential parking permit areas as cited above, if 
issued in the first six months of the permit year and $2 of 
the fee for each permit if issued in the last six months of 
the permit year, accrues to the Road Fund. The proposed 
legislation would increase the portion of the fee allocated 
to the Road Fund by $1 or 25%, from $4 to $5 of the fee for 
each parking permit purchased in the first six months of 
the permit year. All deposits to the Road Fund from the 
residential parking permit fee are used to offset the costs 
related to the engineering studies, sign installations, and 
sign maintenance associated with the Residential Permit 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

41 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comment: 



Parking Program. The balance of such fees accrue to the 
General Fund. 

1. According to Ms. Kathryn Hile of DPT, the 
Department estimates that a total of $1,354,245 will be 
collected in FY 1997-98 from residential parking permit 
fees, including fees for rental vehicles, visitors, and 
commercial parking permits. Under the proposed 
increases, the Department estimates that a total of 
$1,767,378 would be collected in FY 1998-99 from such 
fees, or an increase of approximately $413,133. The 
Attachment, provided by DPT, is a breakdown of (a) the 
present revenues collected by each type of residential 
parking permit fee, (b) the proposed fees and the amount 
of annual revenues estimated by '-ach type of residential 
parking permit fee, and (c) the annual increases to be 
realized from each type of fee. 

2. Ms. Hile notes that the last time all of the types of 
residential parking permit fees covered by this legislation 
increased was 1992. 

3. The increased revenue to be realized by the proposed 
ordinance was included in DPT's FY" 1998-99 budget. 



Recommendation: 



Based on the Finance Committee's approval of the DPT 
FY 1998-99 budget, approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

42 



Attachment 



/-> 


H 


f ' 


S 1 


^ 


O 

rt 


CO 


sr 


pa 


C3 


co 




fi> 


h- 1 






i-h 




o 




CD 




o 




H 




3 




CO 




rt 




rt 




03 




O 




o 
rt 




H 




O 




rt 




i-i 




ID 








3 




Hi 





^ 



CO 



00 



-C- 

I— 1 



cr^£ 

I— "u 



CCCT 






H n 3 o 

2 s re o 

3 3 12. 3. 

"C = n. — 

c — n> is 

a g = a 

>5 a 7 



en o o -^ 



o j u oi 
5 s SS S5 5S 



4/» ul 

m W O CI 

-* JO O M 

Xj "id b "-k 

cu £ m _* 

O — » J». 10 



d O ? O 



03 -1 St » 

•5 ?■ 5- ° 



, <*) </» ro 

<" Nl M rji 

t_n en -j. r_n 

b b b b 

a o o o 



■w <rt -I 

O) _» m 



5 "0 3 a 

kj 3 re in 

u ° w -n 

£ o a » 

cd h, f> — 

n = 3 

— - ■ CO 

W n? 2, 

« S- T5 

a =■ » 



=. re a 
re | g 

-n _i 
re 



w 



re n 

re is 

> 3 



■C," 



(n 



O </) Ol CD 

_M U -i O 

Ul 00 "-l "-* 

Q u aa ca 



3 m 

° 73 

£ " 

2 < 

a. re 



re re 



»* O CO o 



ft V> V* 

NJ S W en M 

~~J P .-* *, r* .-- 1 

1 NJ M D) J O 

— J C3 CO ID Ul — J 

k -j ~-< o --J cn > 



a cm -vi tn 
b b b b 

o o a o 



</> tn M 

--J Cd Ul 

ui bi b 



A3 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 7 -File 98-891 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) 

Ordinance amending Article 15, Chapter XI, Part II of the 
San Francisco Municipal Code (Traffic Code) by amending 
Section 314 thereto, providing for residential parking 
permit fees. 

The proposed legislation would increase fees for 
residential parking permits by $6 or 28.6 percent, from 
$21 to $27, if purchased in the first six months of the 
permit year, and by $3 or 28.6 percent, from $10.50 to 
$13.50, if purchased in the last sfx months of the permit 
year. 

The proposed legislation would also increase the permit 
fee for rental vehicles parked in a residential parking 
permit area by $5 or $100 percent, from $5 to $10. The fee 
for a temporary visitors permit, for vehicles registered 
outside the residential parking permit area, which may be 
issued for a maximum period of eight weeks, would be 
increased by $5 or 100 percent, from $5 to $10 for each 
consecutive two-week period. 

The proposed legislation would also increase the annual 
fee for commercial parking permits, by $7 or 25 percent, 
from $28 to $35 for each permit if purchased during the 
first six months of the permit year and by $1 or 6.1 
percent, from $16.50 to $17.50 if purchased during the 
last six months of the permit year. 

Currently, $4 of the fee, for each of the parking permits 
for residential parking permit areas as cited above, if 
issued in the first six months of the permit year and $2 of 
the fee for each permit if issued in the last six months of 
the permit year, accrues to the Road Fund. The proposed 
legislation would increase the portion of the fee allocated 
to the Road Fund by $1 or 25%, from $4 to $5 of the fee for 
each parking permit purchased in the first six months of 
the permit year. All deposits to the Road Fund from the 
residential parking permit fee are used to offset the costs 
related to the engineering studies, sign installations, and 
sign maintenance associated with the Residential Permit 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

41 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Julv 8. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Parking Program. The balance of such fees accrue to the 
General Fund. 



Comment: 



Recommendation: 



1. According to Ms. Kathryn Hile of DPT, the 
Department estimates that a total of $1,816,364 will be 
collected in FY 1997-98 from residential parking permit 
fees, including fees for rental vehicles, visitors, and 
commercial parking permits. Under the proposed 
increases, the Department estimates that a total of 
$2,356,571 would be collected in FY 1998-99 from such 
fees, or an increase of approximately $540,207 The 
Attachment, provided by DPT, is a breakdown of (a) the 
present revenues collected by each type of residential 
parking permit fee, (b) the proposed fees and the amount 
of annual revenues estimated by each type of residential 
parking permit fee, and (c) the annual increases to be 
realized from each type of fee. 

_:. Ms. Hile notes that the last time all of the types of 
residential parking permit fees covered by this legislation 
increased was 1992. 

3. The increased revenue to be realized by the proposed 
ordinance was included in DPTs FY 1998-99 budget. 

Based on the Finance Committee's approval of the DPT 
FY 1998-99 budget, approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

42 



Attachment 



o 



^ n 3J 

2 o re 

3 3 EG. „ 

"□ a a. -i 

C = CD B= 

"2 ET 2L 



tn -• to » 
en o o -~j 



-«. ho 

O J U Ol 

5? S? S 5 S? 



2 



-» jM O 

Vo *tp b 

cc £. ho 

o -■■ J*. 



CJ — » 



O) en 

O </! Ol CO 
N) U -» O 



O CO O tjJ 



<V5 </> 

ui cn m 

- *> r* r 1 

W O) -i o 
Co (D Ul nJ 
O -«J O) *- 



-n g 

id ^ 



5 rn 

*3 ■ 

</> J" 

s < 

— CD 



H 


O 


33 


n 


H 


CD 


D 


CD 


o 


^c 


3 

"O 


3 


en 

5. 




i 


□ 


a 


CD 


ts 




5 


CD 


a 


2 




•5 


3 


E 


o 


n 

c 




</! 


</» 


ro 




«« 


N> 


ro 


Ln 


-n 


Ln 


CD 




01 


CD 


b 


b 


is 


a 


CD 


a 


o 


a 


o 


KJ 




■w 


m 




>« 








^1 


ft 




O! 


-» 


pi 


CO 




Ol 


o 


b 






O 


O 


CD 












"3 










3 










■a 










D 










en 










re 








-feo 


a 


(a 


w 


Vl 


UJ 


-n 




UJ 


ro 


M 


a 


c_n 


-J 


Ui 


ft 

CD 


b 


b 


b 


CD 


ta 


a 


o 


a 


< 
CD 




■es 


tn 


Rj 


n 








to 






-j 


U 


Ln 






In 


tn 


b 






Q 


o 


LJ 





5 "0 3 D 
►o a <t re 
u ° w "D 



O 


i> 


- 


ro 


3 


- 


a 




re 


Tl 


EJ 


a 


CD 

9 




c 


V) 


Sr 


-a 








— 

CD 


-J 


a 
c 


tj 


3 


CD 




CD 


| 


a 
a 

H 



> 3 



A3 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 8 - File 98-979 
Department: 

Item: 

Location: 
Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

Lessee: 

No. of Sq. Ft. and 
Cost Per Month: 



Annual Cost: 



San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) 
Department of Real Estate (DRE) 

Resolution authorizing a new lease of real property at 626 
Potrero Street for the Police Department. 

626 Potrero Street 

To provide offices, storage, and parking for the Narcotics/ 
Vice Division of the SFPD 

Jack M. Keeney and LaVonne Keeney 

City and County of San Francisco 



16,000 square feet of office space and storage and 16,485 
square feet of parking area (32,485 square feet total) at a 
monthly cost of $14,500 for office space and storage 
(approximately SO. 91 per square foot of office space and 
storage) and S4,000 for parking (approximately $0.24 per 
square foot of parking), for a total cost of $18,500 per 
month, or approximately $0.57 per square foot. 

$222,000 



Utilities and 

Janitorial Services: All costs for utilities and janitorial services would be paid 
by the City. 



Term of Lease: 

Right of Renewal: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



The lease will commence on the date that it is approved by 
the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor, expected to be in 
July of 1998 and continue for ten years through July of 
2008. 

None 

Narcotics Forfeiture and Asset Seizure Fund in the Police 
Department's FY 1998-99 budget 

The proposed lease would provide space for the SFPD's 
Narcotics/Vice Division. The property consists of a two- 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



story 16,000 square foot building plus 16,485 square feet of 
parking space which can accommodate 52 vehicles. The 
building's upper floor consists of 7,500 square feet of office 
space, and the lower level consists of 8,500 square feet of 
storage areas (including space for 10 additional vehicles), 
smaller offices (these offices are unheated and will only be 
used only on a temporary basis), a restroom/locker area, 
and a training/ meeting room. 

Although the Narcotics and Vice Units are part of the same 
division and under the direction of one captain, they are 
currently located at separate sites. The 56 positions of the 
Narcotics Unit are currently occupying 6,500 square feet of 
office space owned by the Housing Authority at 1815 
Egbert Street, for an average of approximately 116 square 
feet per employee. Lieutenant Bob Bullard of the Police 
Department reports that the Department is using this 
space in exchange for providing the Housing Authority with 
security in the form of two full-time officers. Attachment I, 
from Deputy Chief William Welch of the Police Department 
to Mr. Anthony J. DeLucchi of the Real Estate Department, 
explains that the Narcotics Division has been asked by the 
Housing Authority to vacate this space. The 19 positions in 
the Vice Unit are currently occupying 2,500 square feet of 
office space in the Hall of Justice, located at 850 Bryant 
Street, for an average of approximately 132 square feet per 
employee. 

According to Deputy Chief John Willet of the SFPD's 
Investigations Bureau, the SFPD would like to consolidate 
the Narcotics and Vice Units at one location in order to (a) 
improve communication between the Narcotics and Vice 
Units, (b) allow staff of both units to share equipment and 
vehicles, and (c) facilitate the Division's undercover 
operations. In addition, Deputy Chief Willet advises that 
the relocation of the Narcotics and Vice Units to 626 
Potrero Street would help afleviate overcrowding at the 
Hall of Justice, and that the relocation of the Vice Unit 
would allow staff from the Field Operations Bureau to 
relocate from cramped quarters within the Hall of Justice 
(See Attachment II). 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Jul}' 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



The NarcoticsA r ice Division of the SFPD has a total of 75 
employees that would relocate to the proposed site at 626 
Potrero Street with 7,500 square feet of office space, for an 
average of approximately 100 square feet per employee, 
which the SFPD considers to be adequate. 

1. The Police Department advises that the Narcotics Unit 
requires secure space for approximately 50 vehicles and the 
Vice Unit requires space for approximately 10 vehicles. 
According to Mr. Ken Chopping of the Real Estate 
Department, while the outdoor parking areas only have 
room for 52 vehicles, the storage area located in the lower 
level of the building has room for 10 additional vehicles, for 
a total of 62 vehicles. 



2. Mr. Chopping advises that the proposed monthly lease 
of $14,500 for office space and storage (approximately $0.91 
per square foot of office space and storage) and $4,000 for 
parking (approximately $0.24 per square foot of parking), 
for a total cost of $18,500 per month, or approximately 
$0.57 per square foot, represents fair market value. 

3. The City will be responsible for tenant improvements 
required for its use including office modifications, estimated 
by the Police Department to cost $150,000, and included in 
the Department's 1998-99 budget. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 




Attachment I 

POLICE DEPARTMENT 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

THOMAS ]. CAHILL HAU Of JUSTICE 

850 BRYANT STREIT 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 941 03 



FRED H. LAU 



CHiEFOfPouci February 20, 1998 (nHHv^HO^HtS 

D7" CCT\TC ""-" 



K3 2 4. 1993 



Mr. Anthony J. DeLucchi 

Director of Property 

Real Estate Department 

25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 400 

San Francisco, CA 94102 



Dear Mr. Delucchi, 

The Police Department has been recently notified by the Housing .Authority that the Narcotics 
Division must vacate the space they currently occupy at 1815 Egbert Street. The Police 
Department has investigated the possibility of relocating the unit to Treasure Island, but after 
evaluation we have deemed that site unsuitable. 

The Narcotics Division requires secure space for approximately 50 employees and parking for 
50 vehicles. Due to the substantial cost of telecommunications and compute wiring, it is 
desirable to obtain a long-term location. 

I request the assistance of the Real Estate Department in securing a suitable location I 
appreciate your consideration in this matter 



Sincerelv 




William N. Vveich 
Deputy Chief 
Administration 



kl 




POLICE DEPARTMENT 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

thomas i cahiil hall of justice 

aSO BRYANT STREET 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94103 



Attachment 2 



FRED H. LAU 

CHIEF OF POLICE 



June 25, 1998 

Mr. Harvey Rose 

Board of Supervisors Budget Analyst 

1390 Market SL Suite 1025 

San Francisco. California 94 1 02 

Dear Mr. Rose: 

During the mid 1980s the entire Narcotics/Vice Division of the Police Department was 
housed at 1 8 15 Egbert St, property leased by the City from HUD. Approximately ten 
years ago HUD took back some of the property which did not leave enough office space 
for both the Narcotics and Vice Units. As a result Vice relocated to the Hall of Justice. 

There are several reasons why it would be advantageous for the Narcotics and Vice Units 
to reunite at a common location Currently, the Commanding Officer of the Division must 
shuttle back and forth to \isit the members of the two units that report to him Relocating 
these units to the Potrero Avenue site would mean closer supervision and better 
communication among management staff. Secondly, both Narcotics and Vice are 
involved in undercover operations. Working at the same location would allow members 
to share equipment vehicles and occasio nall y personnel. Another reason why moving 
from the Hall of Justice is important for Vice officers is their need to remain 
"undercover." It is vital that they be seen as little as possible in a public police facility 
such as the Flail of Justice. Finally, the area at the Hall of Justice currentiy occupied by 
Vice is desperately needed for office space by the Field Operations Bureau. FOB staff 
members are currently working in very cramped quarters. 

For years our Department has been hoping to reunite the Narcotics/Vice Division. The 
Potrero St. building offers an ideal location at a reasonable price. If you or your staff 
members have any questions concerning the proposed move please do not hesitate to call. 

Sincerely, 

N S WTJLLET 
Chief 

Investigations Bureau 



A3 



Memo to Finance Committee 
July 8, 1998 



Item 9 - File 98-986 

Department: 

Item: 

Location: 
Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

Lessee: 

No. of Sq. Ft. and 
Cost Per Month: 

Annual Cost: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 

Resolution authorizing a new lease of real property at 650 
Fifth Street for the Department of Public Health. 

650 Fifth Street 

For use by the Forensic Services Division of the 
Department of Public Health (DPH). 

Townsend Street Associates, LLC 

Citv and Countv of San Francisco 



Approximately 3,060 square feet at a monthly base rent of 
$4,590, or $1.50 per square foot. 

$55,080 



Utilities and Janitor 

Provided by Lessor: Electricity is paid by the City, estimated to cost $125 per 
month; all other costs are paid by the Landlord. 



Term of Lease: 



Right of Renewal: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



The proposed lease would commence on the later of either 
the date that the Landlord satisfactorily completes the 
required leasehold improvements to the additional space, 
estimated to be in August, 1998, or upon approval by the 
Board of Supervisors and the Mayor, and would expire 
June 30, 2003 (approximately five years). 

None 

DPH's FY 1998-99 budget (General Fund) 

The proposed new lease would enable DPH to relocate the 
administrative offices of the Forensic Services Division, 
currently located at 1380 Howard Street. According to Mr. 
Frank Patt of the Forensic Sendees Division of DPH, the 
relocation would help to alleviate overcrowding at 1380 
Howard Street, and would enable the Forensic Services 
Division to consolidate its staff at one location and to be in 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

AQ 



Memo to Finance Committee 
Julv 8, 1998 



Comments: 



close proximity to the Hall of Justice and the Sheriffs jail 
facilities. 

According to Mr. Patt, there are currently 11 Forensic 
Services staff members at 1380 Howard Street, plus an 
additional four staff members who spend approximately 
one-third of their time at 1380 Howard Street (the 
remaining two-thirds of their time is spent at various jail 
facilities). According to Mr. Mark Zuffo of the Real Estate 
Department, these 15 staff members occupy approximately 
2,000 square feet at 1380 Howard Street, for an average of 
approximately 133 square feet per employee. The 1380 
Howard Street facility is also occupied by the Mental 
Health and Substance Abuse Divisions of DPH. 

According to Mr. Patt, the 15 Forensic Services staff 
members would be relocated to the proposed new space at 
650 Fifth Street and would have an average of 204 square 
feet per employee. In addition. Mr. Patt advises that three 
interns will be working part-time at 650 Fifth Street. 

1. According to Mr. Zuffo, the lessor will make tenant 
improvements to the premises, at no cost to the City. These 
improvements include constructing offices, painting, and 
carpeting at an estimated cost of $55,000. 

2. According to Mr. Zuffo, the proposed rent of $1.50 per 
square foot represents the fair market rent for this space. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

50 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 10 - File 98-995 



Department: 
Item: 

Description: 



Comment: 



Mayor's Office 

Ordinance amending the Municipal Code, Part III, Article 
7 by amending Section 515.01 to delete the allocation of 
City funding for the Mayor's Office of Protocol. 

In accordance with Proposition F, which was approved by 
the San Francisco electorate in June of 1998, the proposed 
ordinance would amend the Municipal Code, Part III, 
Article 7, Section 515.01 by deleting the City's allocation 
of Hotel Tax monies to the Mayor's Office of Protocol. 

In the FY 1998-99 budget, the Mayor's Office of Protocol 
was originally allocated $1,612,500 of Hotel Tax monies. 
Additionally, $40,000 from the Mayor's Special/Protocol 
Fund, which is supported by the General Fund, allocates 
$15,000 to protocol activities, for a total budget for the 
Mayor's Office of Protocol of $1,637,500. The remaining 
$25,000 ($40,000 less $15,000) in the Mayor's 
Special/Protocol Fund is allocated to other special projects 
conducted by the Mayor's Office. 

In response to the passage of Proposition F, the Finance 
Committee has recommended the deletion of the 
$1,612,500 in Hotel Tax monies from the Mayor's FY 
1998-99 budget, which had been allocated to the Mayor's 
Special/Protocol Fund budget prior to the passage of 
Proposition F. According to Mr. John Madden of the 
Controller's Office, the remaining $15,000 allocation to 
the Mayor's Office of Protocol from the Mayor's 
Special/Protocol Fund will be administratively deleted by 
the Controller's Office. Such a technical adjustment, in 
addition to this proposed legislation, would bring the City 
into compliance with the provisions of Proposition F, 
which states that "the positions and appropriations of the 
office of protocol are hereby repealed and abolished." 

This proposed ordinance would codify that Hotel Tax 
monies would no longer be allocated to the Mayor's Office 
of Protocol. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

51 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Recommendation: Based on the Finance Committee's previous 

recommendation to delete the allocation of Hotel Tax 
Funds from the FY 1998-99 budget of the Mayor's Office 
of Protocol, approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

52 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 11 -File 98-943 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Ordinance appropriating S2,300,00 from Water 
Department operating budget fund balance to Claims and 
Judgments and authorizing settlement of Litigation 
between Hefter, et al. and the City and County of San 
Francisco (Alameda Superior Court Case No. 786568). 

$2,300,000 

Water Department Operating Budget 

The proposed supplemental appropriation ordinance 
would serve the dual purpose of appropriating $2,300,000 
to settle litigation against the City as well as authorizing 
the City Attorney to settle the litigation between Hefter, 
et al. and the City and County of San Francisco, Alameda 
Superior Court No. 786568. 

In the spring of 1995, earth movement began on Rainbow 
Drive, part of which is owned by the City, in an 
unincorporated area of San Mateo Count}' between 
Rainbow Drive and Polhemus Road. The earth movement 
greatly accelerated in December of 1996 and January of 
1997, and resulted in severe damage to (1) two single 
family residences, at 1406 and 1412 Rainbow Drive, 
which resulted in the closure of San Mateo County's 
Polhemus Road, and (2) the undeveloped hillside, a 
portion of which is owned by the City, which now 
threatens the structural integrity of the City's 96 inch 
diameter Crystal Springs Bypass Water Pipeline located 
beneath Polhemus Road. 

This proposed settlement is a cost sharing agreement 
with San Mateo County in which the City would pay 
$2,300,000 and San Mateo County would pay $3,100,000, 
for a total payment of $5,400,000 to the Trustee, Mr. 
Anthony Marsh of the law firm Morgan, Franich, Fredkin 
& Marsh. In turn, the Trustee would pay the contractor, 
Soil Engineering Construction, Inc., to (1) purchase the 
residences located at 1406 and 1412 Rainbow Drive, in 
order to compensate the owners for damage to their real 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



property, (2) pay the homeowners for all claims of 
damages, attorney's fees and other costs as a result of this 
subject litigation, and (3) completely repair the hillside, 
with substantial completion on or before November 15, 
1998. 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



In consideration for the settlement and payment by San 
Francisco and San Mateo County of the settlement 
amount totaling $5.4 million, the subject litigation and all 
cross complaints will be dismissed with prejudice. 

1. According to Mr. Joshua Milstein of the City 
Attorney's Office, the proposed settlement agreement 
provides that the City will pay the settlement amount of 
$2,300,000 in installments, without interest, from Water 
Department revenue. The City's first payment in the 
amount of $400,000 is due on July 24, 1998. The City's 
second payment of $500,000 is due on July 30, 1998. The 
remaining amount will be paid in two equal installments 
of $500,000 at the end of August and September, and a 
final $400,000 payment at the end of October. 

J. Mr. Milstein reports that the PUC has issued a 
resolution recommending approval of the proposed 
settlement agreement. 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

54 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 12 - File 98-978 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Ordinance appropriating $4,907,500 from the Clean 
Water Program Fund balance to Claims and Judgements 
and authorizing settlement of litigation between Howard 
and Iran Billman and State Farm General Insurance 
Company and the City and County of San Francisco, 
Superior Court Case No. 980-740. 

$4,907,500 

PUC Clean Water Program 

This proposed ordinance would serve the dual purpose of 
appropriating $4,907,500 to settle litigation against the 
City as well as authorizing the City Attorney to settle the 
litigation with the plaintiffs (1) Howard and Iran Billman 
with a payment by the City to the Billmans of $3,065,000 
and (2) State Farm Insurance Company with a payment 
by the City to State Farm of $1,842,500. 

On December 11, 1995, the sandy soil underlying the 
hillside between 24 th Avenue and El Camino del Mar in 
the West Clay Park district of the City was eroded by 
storm water flowing from a failed brick sewer that crossed 
beneath the slope. The erosion resulted in the loss of (a) 
one single family residence at 125 El Camino del Mar and 
(b) the loss of a neighboring garage. The erosion also 
undermined several other properties, portions of El 
Camino del Mar, 24 th Avenue, the Presidio, and the brick 
sewer itself. 

The PUC declared an emergency on December 11, 1995. 
The Board of Supervisors approved a resolution 
authorizing the emergency repair work in January of 
1996 (Resolution No. 84-96). 

In consideration for the proposed settlement payment, the 
Billmans have agreed to transfer to the City title in fee, 
sole ownership and possession of the Billmans' real 
property, located at 125 El Camino del Mar, and the 
Billmans and State Farm have agreed to dismiss with 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

55 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 8, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comment: 



Recommendation: 



prejudice the City from the referenced litigation, to fully 
release the City from all claims arising from the 
December 11, 1995 Seacliff incident, and to assign to the 
City all the claims that the Billmans and State Farm 
have against co-defendants to the action. 

According to Ms. Louise Simpson of the City Attorney's 
Office, if the Finance Committee needs additional 
information regarding the basis for the proposed 
settlement, such information should be addressed by the 
City Attorney's Office is closed session. 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 




[arvey M. Rose 



Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

56 



x M I N U T E S ~~"~V» v. , 

l,r '" DOr-IMENTSDEPT. 

°H*> > FINANCE COMMITTEE »•.. 

c BOARD OF SUPERVISORS UUL - 1 8 19QQ 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO o AM CD ..._.„ 

y bAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY - 

REGULAR MEETING MAHV 



WEDNESDAY. JULY 15, 1998 - 1:00 P.M. VETERANS BUILDING 

4 01 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

Meeting Commenced: 1:05 p.m. 

CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All items listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are 

considered to be routine by the Committee and will be acted upon 
by a single, roll-call vote of the Committee. There will be no 
separate discussion of these items unless a member of the 
Committee or the public so requests, in which event the matter 
shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a 
separate item. 

a. File 98-0697 . [Reserved Funds, Municipal Railway] Hearing 
to consider release of reserved funds, Municipal Railway 
(Federal Grant, Res. No. 3-92) , in the amount of 
$2,000,000, to complete implementation activities for the 
MUNI Woods Motor Coach Division Fuel and Wash 
Rehabilitation Project. (Municipal Railway) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $2,000,000 approved. Filed. 

b. File 98-0981 . [Reserved Funds, Recreation and Park 
Department] Hearing to consider release of reserved funds, 
Recreation and Park Department, in the amount totaling 
$1,787,950 ($893,583 from 1987 Park Bond, Ordinance No. 
256-91, and $500,000 gift from California Center Partners, 
plus $394,367 accrued interest as of April 30, 1998, 
Resolution No. 505-89) to fund the Portsmouth Square-Phase 
3 Improvement Project. (Recreation and Park Department) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $1,787,950 approved. Filed. 



c. File 98-0982 . [Reserved Funds, Recreation and Park 
Department] Hearing to consider release of reserved funds, 
Recreation and Park Department, in the amount totaling 
$599,200 (1987 Park Bond, Ordinance No. 256-91), to fund 
the construction of the John McLaren Park Amphitheater 
Renovation Project. (Recreation and Park Department) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $599,230 approved. Filed. 

d. File 98-1071 . [Reserved Funds, Port Commission] Hearing to 
consider release of fundi, Port Commission, in the amount 
of $132,856.88 (San Francisco Harbor Operating Fund Loan 
Revenue, Ordinance No. 40-98), to fund the costs for the 
design and construction of the Hyde Street Fishing Harbor. 
(Port Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $132,856.88 approved. Filed. 

e. File 98-1069 . [Emergency Repair Work, PUC-Water 
Department] Resolution approving the expenditure of funds 
for emergency work for operational costs, watershed damage 
and water treatment costs associated with El Nino storms 
(estimated at $1,100,614). (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 

REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 98-1066 . [Airport Revenue Bonds] Resolution approving the 
issuance of up to $1,400,000,000 aggregate principal amount of 
San Francisco International Airport Second Series Revenue 
Refunding Bonds for the purpose of refinancing certain 
outstanding 1991 Resolution Bonds and Subordinate Bonds of the 
Airport Commission issued for the purpose of financing or 
refinancing certain capital improvements at San Francisco 
International Airport; approving the maximum interest rate 
thereon; approving the time for sale of Refunding Bonds as 
ending December 31, 2001; and approving a maximum number issues 
and final maturity date of the sale of Refunding Bonds net later 
than May 1, 2032. (Airport Commission) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Jon Ballesteros, S.F. 
International Airport - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-0934 . [IHSS Contract with Addus Healthcare] Resolution 
approving the contract between the City and County of San 
Francisco and Addus Healthcare for the provision of In-Home 
Supportive Services for the period from August 1, 1998 to June 
30, 2001, with a possible renewal for one year, in the amount of 
$14,888,844. (Supervisor Teng) 
(Consideration continued from 7/8/98) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Wil Lightborne, Dept. of 
Human Services - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

NOTE : Supervisor Teng replaced Dept. of Human 
Services as sponsor . 

File 98-0935 . [IHSS Contract with IHSS Consortium of S.F.] 
Resolution approving the contract between the City and County of 
San Francisco and the IHSS Consortium of San Francisco for the 
provision of In-Home Supportive Services for the period from 
August 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001, with a possible renewal for one 
year, in the amount of $16,132,813. (Supervisor Teng) 
(Consideration continued from 7/8/98) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Wil Lightborne, Dept. of 
Human Services - support. 



ACTION: 



Hearing held. 
NOTE: 



Recommended . 



Supervisor Teng replaced Dept, 
Services as sponsor . 



of Human 



File 98-1062 . [Court Compensation] Ordinance setting schedules 
of compensation and other economic benefits for fiscal year 
1998-1999 for certain classifications of persons employed by the 
Municipal Court for the City and County of San Francisco. 
(Municipal Court) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Judge Donaldson, 
Municipal Court - support. 



ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on page 1, line 19 after 

"Appendix 1" to replace "attached hereto" with "in 
File 98-1062." and to add the following language: 
"The general funds of the City and County of San 
Francisco shall not be used to fund any of the salary 
increases or benefits referred to in this 
ordinance.". Recommended as amended. 



6. File 98-1022 . [Property Lease-City of Santa Clara] Resolution 
authorizing an assignment, assumption and amendment of a 40-year 
lease of Public Utilities land located in the City of Santa 
Clara for parking and landscaping from Larvan Properties, 
Assignor, to MELP VII, Assignee. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Gary Dowd, PUC - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to 7/29/98. 

7. File 98-1031 . [Sale of Surplus Property - Sunol Aqueduct] 
Resolution authorizing the sale of Public Utilities Commission 
surplus real property (approximately 1.47 acres) identified as a 
portion of the Sunol Aqueduct easement located near Fremont, 
Alameda County, California to Mission Clay Products Company; 
also see File 172-96-5. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Tony DeLucchi - Real 
Estate Dept. - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

8. File 98-1033 . [Sale of Surplus Property - Sunol, Alameda 
County] Resolution authorizing the sale of 11,240 square feet of 
land of Public Utilities Commission surplus property iaentified 
as a portion of Assessor Parcel No. 96-115-6-1 located in Sunol, 
Alameda County, California to the State of California. (Public 
Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Tony DeLucchi - Real 
Estate Dept. - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

9. File 98-1067 . [Outreach Newspapers] Resolution designating the 
Bay View, Inc. to be outreach newspaper of the City and County 
of San Francisco for the African-American community; designating 
the China Press to be outreach newspaper of the City and County 
of San Francisco for the Chinese Community; and designating the 
El Latino to be outreach newspaper of the City and County of San 

Francisco for the Hispanic community, commencing , for 

outreach advertising. (Purchasing Department) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Consideration continued to 7/29/98. 

10. File 98-1068 . [Outreach Newspaper] Resolution designating the 
San Francisco Bay Times for outreach advertising for the City 
and County of San Francisco for the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual 

Community beginning , and until such time that a 

periodical can be designated as the official outreach periodical 
for the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual community. (Purchasing Department) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Consideration continued to 7/29/98. 



11. File 98-1073 . [Sale of Surplus City-Owned Property] Resolution 
confirming sale of surplus City-owned property under the 
jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works; Assessor's Block 
3807, Lot 12, 7th and Channel Streets & Assessor's Block 5067, 
Lot 3, San Bruno Avenue near Campbell Avenue. (Real Estate 
Department) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Tony DeLucchi - Real 
Estate Dept. - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on page 2, line 5 after "Works" 
to replace "Realty Trust Account" with "Real Property 
Fund."; amended on page 2, beginning on line 5 to 
delete "to be used in part by DPW for relocation of 
its Bureau of Street Use and Mapping in closer 
proximity to the Departments of Building Inspection 
and City Planning and for the relocation of other 
Bureaus to improve customer service and operational 
efficiency." Recommended as amended. 

12. File 98-1085 . [Procurement] Ordinance amending Administrative 
Code Section 21.46 to authorize the Purchaser to purchase goods 
and services under contracts executed by the State of California 
or the United States of America. (Supervisor Katz) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Steve Nelson, 

Administrative Services Dept. - support; Ed Lee, 
Purchaser - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amendment of the Whole (with new title) 
adopted. (See new title) . Recommended as amended. 

New Title: [Procurement] Ordinance amending 
Administrative Code Section 21.46 to authorize the 
Purchaser to purchase goods and services under 
contracts executed by the State of California. 
(Supervisor Katz) 



VOTE ON ALL ITEMS WAS 3-0. 
Meeting Adjourned: 1: 55 p.m. 



Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn, Dept. 41 



0.J5 



CITY AND COUNTY 



1 5 



M 




OFj>AN FRANCISCO 



J30ARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



TO: 



July 10, 1998 



Finance Committee 



FROM: Budget Analyst R^cc^^^kA^s -ftr k>i*^m e-f... - .J* •- \ 

oocuSeRtsocpt- 

SUBJECT: July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting .yt .. . ^qqq 

o AN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Item la - File 98-697 



Department: 



Municipal Railway (MUNI) 
Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 



Item: 



Hearing to consider the release of reserved funds in the 
amount of $2,000,000 for MUNI to complete 
implementation activities for the MUNI Woods Motor 
Coach Division Fuel and Wash Rehabilitation Project. 



Amount: 



$2,000,000 



Description: 



In January of 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a 
resolution (File 94-91-8) authorizing the Public Utilities 
Commission (PUC) to apply for, accept, and expend 
Federal Section 9 Operating Assistance funds in the 
amount of $7,532,454 and Urban Mass Transit 
Administration (UMTA) Section 9 Formula Assistance 
funds in the amount of $26,819,276, plus $6,704,819 in 
required State and/or local match funds, for a total of 
$41,056,549 for four MUNI capital improvement projects. 
Of the $41,056,549, a total of $33,524,095 was placed on 
reserve, pending submission of budget details. Of the 
$33,524,095 reserved, $5,381,000 was reserved for 
Facilities Rehabilitation Projects. Of the $5,381,000, 
$2,416,801 remains on reserve. 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Budget: 



MUNI is now requesting that the Board of Supervisors 
release $2,000,000 of the $2,416,801 remaining on reserve 
for Facilities Rehabilitation for the MUNI Woods Motor 
Coach Division Fuel and Wash Rehabilitation Project 
(Project). The Project would remove 12 existing 
underground storage tanks located at 1095 Indiana 
Street, 3 of which have leaked, and remove the 
contaminated soil around these tanks. Attachment I, 
provided by MUNI, contains a description of the project. 



MUNI - Design/Construction 
Estimated Construction Contract 
Contingency 
Total 



$166,700 

1.500,000 

333.300 

$2,000,000 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



Attachment II provided by MINI contains budget detail 
estimates to support the summary budget shown above. 

1. As shown in Attachment I, provided by Mr. Robert 
Rincon of MUNI, the subject storage tanks are not in 
compliance with Federal regulations because they have 
only a single wall. Mr. Rincon further advises that the 
removal of the subject storage tanks would insure that 
MUNI is in compliance with the Federal Hazardous and 
Solid Waste Amendments to the Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act (Code of Federal Regulations Part 40 
Section 280) which mandates that all storage tanks that 
are not in compliance be removed by December 22, 1998. 

2. Mr. Rincon reports than an invitation for bids to select 
a contractor will be issued in July of 1998 and it is 
expected that a contractor will be selected by August of 
1998. Mr. Rincon estimates that the work will be 
completed by March of 1999. 

Approve the requested release of reserved funds. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachmen t 1 

Project Management • Phone: (415) 354-0785 
Public Transportation Department « 1145 Market St., 5th 71. • San Francisco, CA 94103* Fax:(415)554-3176 



To: Laura Ronneberg 

From: Robert Rincon 

Date: July 6, 1998 

Subject: Woods Tank Removal 

This project is to remove existing underground storage tanks (USTs) and mitigate contaminated 
soil around the tanks at the Woods Maintenance Facility. 

The UST for petroleum products is regulated under me Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste 
Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Code of Federal 
Regulations, Part 40, Section 280. Authority to implement federal laws is delegated to the 
California State Water Resources Control Board and the San Francisco Department of Public 
Health. 

The existing USTs axe composed of single-wall tanks that do not meet federal requirements. It is 
imperative that Muni decommission and remove these tanks by December 22, 1998 to avoid 
penalties of 515,000 per tank per day. Three of the seven underground diesel tanks have already 
been abandoned in place due to leaks. 

The work to be performed under the coniract documents includes: setup an interim fueling 
facility; decommission and remove twelve USTs; and remediate contaminated soils around the 
tanks 




Attachment 2 







. - 


_ 


CM O 


rj 


m 


r: ) 


CM CO 


O) 


a 


a 

o 

a 


c 
o 
o 


o 


.^ 









CD 


cn 


CO rr 


r- 


co 


cc 


CM T*» 


CO 


o 


o 


vO 




5 


K> 


CO 


cO_ CD_ 


cr> 


in 


-.- 


a? co 


CO_ 


o 


o 


m 







o" 


o" 


co" o" 


US 


CO 


"-- 


r- of 


CD* 


o" 


o 


o 
CO 


C? 






o 


CM 


CM 


f - >: — 


<-j 


</> 


CO 


CO i- 


CO 


U3 


o 


pf* 




W- 4fr 


V> «/> <f> 




</> 


U* r- 
C# 






LT 



























«/j- 


'.-> 


</> 




ri 




-r 




■*t o 




a 


CO 


CD 




















-J 




co co 




■* 


- — 


x — 


















w 


CM 




t — x— 






CO 


CO 


















3 
































O 
































X 






























■: 




CO 




co en 




C«J 


CO 


CO 


















>d" 




°. CD 




■»"". 


o 


CD 
















o 


$ c. 


cc 




OT CO 




ca 


C) 


ri 
















■o 






r- 




CO 


|Si 


CD 
















3 re 






























re 


O d 






























o 


:r 






























»— 
































CD 




























































w 
































o 
































o 
































l- 
































o 
































XI 
























ca 








re 








10 

CM 




o 




CO 

CO 

CO 









CO 
■g 

B 










o 

'55 

re 


s 




00 <U 

o « 

CN .E 




CM 


a 

CM 

m 


o 
o 

CO 

Q. 




o 
re 


■ 

c 
re 
h 


ffl 

E 

- 




a) 

"re 
E 






O 

a 

x> 


c 
OJ 

re 
c 
B 

o 

'a 


75 

2 


— c 
«- UJ 

1 8 

UJ o 

— o 

"> OT 




a 
c 
cn 
c 
UJ 

> 

b 


c5 

C) 

c 

Ol 

UJ 
> 


c 
o 

IS 




re 

_J 

■ 


a 

c 

a 
r 

1 

o 


cr 
o 
« 

E 
E 
a 

o 


o 2 
iJ ~ 

,S tin 
-a Hi 
cu — 

E 3 


UJ 

E 

3 
CO 

CL 

E 






■ 


3 


3 


ij 


O 3 


O 




a 


CD 





3 






_i 


£ 


to 


O < CO 


CO 


b 


O CO 


h 


c 


G 


cr 


H 


_J 






o 




o 




o 








a 






•^ 


o 


*-» 


a 




o 




o 








a 






*Sfc 


o 


a 


r»« 




o 




o_ 








q 






<o 


o 


C5 


o 




CD* 




© 








ef 






CO 


o" 


CM 




CM 




CM 








c 






co 


o 


h^y 




y> 












LO 






co 


o_ 










09- 








T— 






fc^ 


cm" 




















!!» 








09- 












, . 


























C 




























c 


















"a c 










E 


















> o 

o 53 


C 




XL 




o 

a 








IS 










£ « 


o 




o 




a 








■ 










E 




a. 




c 


















Q> T3 




o. 




n 








C 

c 

U 

c 

a 










^ E 

a CU 


o 

CD 
C3 
C 

a 




3 
CO 

Ol 
_C£ 

CU 

cu 

cz 




2 

c 
o 

a 












o 

c 




<n o 








p 








Tj 






cn 




-n to 
5 § 








a 








3 






_c 





g 




'en 




c 
a 








■ 
O 






c 
O 


re" 
o 


£ 




LU 




O 








CJ 






O 


1- 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Jul3" 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items lb and lc - Files 98-981 and 98-982 



Department: 
Item: 



Amount and Source 
of Funds: 



Recreation and Park 

Hearing to consider the release of $599,200 in reserved 
funds for the John McLaren Park Amphitheater 
Renovation Project and the release of $1,787,950, for the 
construction of the Portsmouth Square-Phase 3 
Improvement Project. 



1987 Park Improvement Bond Funds: 



John McLaren Park 
Portsmouth Square 
Subtotal 
California Center Partners (CCP) 

Gift-Portsmouth Square 
Interest Accrued on CCP Gift 
As of July 15, 1998- 
Portsmouth Square 
Total 



$599,200 
769.873 



$1,369,073 
500,000 



518.077 
$2,387,150 



Description: 



On June 24, 1991, the Board of Supervisors appropriated 
$7,648,988 for various capital improvement projects 
associated with the 1987 Improvement Park Bond, 
including the John McLaren Park Amphitheater 
Renovation Project and the Portsmouth Square-Phase 3 
Improvement Project. Of this amount, $5,248,650 was 
placed on reserve, pending the submission of budget 
details. 



On July 3, 1989, the Board of Supervisors accepted 
$500,000 from California Center Partners (CCP), the 
successor to Norland Properties, as a gift (File 38-89-15) 
to be deposited into the Open Space Acquisition and Park 
Renovation Fund to be used for the Portsmouth Square- 
Phase 3 Improvement Project. This gift was offered in 
order to meet the terms of a settlement agreement 
between Norland Properties and San Franciscans for 
Reasonable Growth. San Franciscans for Reasonable 
Growth had taken legal action against Norland Properties 
for the construction of a new hotel, located at 345 
California Street, which obstructs sunlight and casts a 
shadow on Portsmouth Square. This $500,000 gift was 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

intended to compensate for the shadowing of Portsmouth 
Square. The interest accrued from the gift was also 
credited toward the Portsmouth Square Project. As of 
July 15, 1998 the estimated accrued interest amounts to 
$518,077. 

File 98-981 

The Recreation and Park Department (RPD) is 
requesting the release of $769,873 in 1987 Park 
Improvement Bond proceeds, the $500,000 CCP gift and 
interest accrued on the CCP gift in the amount of 
$518,077, for a total of $1,787,950, for the Portsmouth 
Square-Phase 3 Improvement Project including: (1) 
improvements to the children's play area, (2) new paving 
on the symmetrical circulation route throughout the 
plaza, and (3) construction of a small activity room 
underneath the Portsmouth Square pedestrian 
bridgeway. Attachment I, provided by RPD, contains a 
complete description and detailed project budget for the 
project. 

File 98-982 

The Recreation and Park Department (RPD) is requesting 
the release of $599,200 in 1987 Park Improvement Bond 
proceeds for the John McLaren Park Amphitheater 
Renovation Project for: (1) electrical and plumbing 
upgrades to the dressing rooms, (2) minor wall 
modifications for maintenance storage, (3) repair and 
enhancement to the stage area, (4) refurbishment of 
audience seating, (5) drainage improvements to the 
immediate area, and (6) construction of a new restroom 
building. Attachment II. provided by RPD. contains a 
complete description and detailed budget for the project. 

Comments: 1. Through a competitive bid process, RPD awarded a 

construction contract to the firm of. Competent Builders, 
Inc. in the amount of $1,443,000. for the Portsmouth 
Square Rehabilitation Phase 3 Improvement Project. 
Competent Builders, Inc. submitted the low bid. 
Attachment III contains a list of the four bids that were 
submitted. 

2. Through a competitive bid process, RPD awarded a 
construction contract to, Alpha Bay Builders, Inc. in the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



amount of $479,590, for the John McLaren Park 
Amphitheater Renovation Project. Alpha Bay Builders, 
Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Attachment rV contains a 
list of the six bids that were submitted. 



Recommendation: Approve the release of reserved funds. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



FROM : 



ftccacnmeni i 
phone NO. : Page 1 of 2 Jul- 07 1998 05:17PM P2 



City and County of San Francisco Recreation and Park Department 




REVISED (2) SUMMARY SHEET 

PORTSMOUTH SQUARE - PHASE 3 

Project Scope 

To improve the children's play area, to provide new paving on a symmetrical 
circulation route throughout the plaza, and to construct a small activity room 
underneath the Portsmouth Square pedestrian bridgeway. 

Budget Summary 

Construction contract $1,443,000 

1 5% contingency $21 6.450 

Construction management (see oage 2 of attachment) 

Inspections $106,920 

Materials Testing Laboratory $1 6,300 

Certified Payroll Verification $5,280 

$128,500 

TOTAL $1,787,950 

Requests for Release 

1 ) 1 987 Park Bond (as per Ordinance #256-91 ) $769,873 

2a) California Center Partners (CCP) gift 

(as per Resolution #505^89) $500,000 

2b) Accrued interest from the CCP gift 

(as per Resolution #505-89) $51 8.077* 

TOTAL $1,787,950 

'Estimated accrued interest from the California Center Partners gift up to and including July 15, 1998. 

K^:SiteSpeafic^Portsnioulh/Revisecl2Sumrnary 



McLaren Lodge, Golden Gate Park FAX; (415)666-7130 

501 Stanyan Street Phone: (415) 831-2700 

San Francisco, CA 94117-1898 



FROM 



PHONE NO. 



Attachment I 
Page 2 of 2 



Jul. 09 1998 02:32PM P4 






© <N QO 

M C\ TT 

q cr\_ oo 
to cC — i 
<n r- 

&■} «/i €/=» 



« N (N 



H 


U 


cs 


rr 


5 


C3 


^ 


lo 


igj 




U 

E 

93 
3 


<s 


25 


Jj 


o 


c 

_2 


•^5 

Ed 


a 
Z 


u 


—* 


ST 


= 


= 
_ 


a 


09 


a 


«! 


U 


X 


83 


a 


- 


B 


u 


e 





o 


tr 


U 


J2 
C-3 


= 


'o 


Q 


- 


3 


o 



3 = 



tn to co 



~ ~ 






•— _o 



O 



i & 

r2 .2 

"8 '5 



= 
4 



~ *5 



o 


e 






H 










>> 


o 


l> 




B 

t/1 
(A 










- 




'3 












T3 


.1 


< 




6 

■a 




en 






a 


"H. 


_u 




< 












5 


2 

3 


< 


<u 


< 


3 


< 


5 


u 


O 


BU 


z. 


V} 


^ 


in 


iz 





City and County of San Francisco 



Page 1 ot 2 

Recreation and Park Department 




SUMMARY SHEET 

JOHN McLAREN park amphitheater renovation 

Project Scope 

Electrical and plumbing upgrades to the dressing rooms, minor wall modifications for 
maintenance storage, repair and enhancement to the stage area, refurbishment to 
the audience seating, drainage improvements to the immediate area, and 
construction of a new restroom building. 

Budget Summary 



Construction contract 




$479,590 


1 5% contingency 




$71,940 


Construction management (see page 


2 of attachment) 




Inspections 


S37.500 




Materials Testing Laboratory 


58,250 




Certified Payroll Verification 


S1.920 





$47,670 



TOTAL 



$599,200 



MY : SitfiSpedfic/Mc!_areiVAmphitfiealer/Summary 



McLaren Lodge, Golden Gate Park 

501 Stanyan Street 

San Francisco, CA 94117-1898 



FAX: (415)666-7130 
Phone: (415)831-2700 



10 



FROM : 



PHONE NO. 



^e 2 of 2 
Jul. 09 1998 02:31PM P2 



J 



« 5 — 

a u £ o\ 

R "S S «"* 

<£ B — SB 

s ■■= £• - 



o 


Ed 


B 

< 


- 

z 


a 

i- 


M 




~z 


= 
- 




U 






c 


O 


B 


CJ 


U 


oa 




u 
u 


£ 






a 




3 


;/: 



crt U3 « 

3 £ i 

5 o 5 

E E E 

i/i i/i i/i 



cn rr 1= 



u Jg 



to _ nJ 



§ I 



'■g S»| 



u 



§ 


B 


. ~ 


E- 


cp 


j* 






W 




■= 


O 


5 




-z 


o 






91 
U 


5 


M 


C/3 






3 ~s 



= 

Q 

■a 

s 

V 

= 
- 

4 



< 2 < £ 

Z 55 z £ 



Z t— 






11 



Attachment III 



|58ft! S§1 

!-!§§ $g~ 
lilts fc§i 



sum in 

in *r tn — *v «sj 

28 8 8S. S.M 



O T O 

- a rf 3 n = 



2,8 s 



1 isj isi cd m r* o CN 



..8 3.8 K.8.S 

IfV N K f in irt *- 

rt n - w N in 



88 = 8 5|Sg 

— BONO *. o !J 

■q - ►.• p _• fs. rf 

" in ia e v In n 
51 






u 1'. 
m 

m. u) 2 
W O 3 

5 5 S 



28" 



1*1 

° * s 



teosooo 
BE ' ; Q - 
S S cs_ {5 o. o 

k in' N W p © — 

r» «J ts •* R as ■» 




53 



= F 



□ So 









• z 



V 



<; 



| 



v 



& 






a | 



I i 

s ! 



i! 



S <r S S 

8. 1 ?« 

i M| 

o < u = 



- 3 

■sis? 
3 = 55 



CD N in e" — ' jg 



5 & » 

i.llill 

5) Q. £ I 2 E o. 



|0B 

7: to a. * ¥ « ° 

if If o si 

< c U n -1 eo o 



its 

H 2 -J 



a 3 



3 S 

V) w 



12 IN3W33UNWU lD3royd'3OH'MdgVJSD2_Wy8E:i0 86. i0 xir 



Attachment IV 



tf) «2 o rt 



s 



e 5 a 



E 5 



a 
5 

o 

13 




W 05 

am 
■5 ^ 



S g g g 

rf e e § 

« tfi o >r 





i z 



n I g m 

li 55 c * -fc » 

3 a "■ 5" 

<rtOh 



e i .i 3 
i. 2 w < 



I 



S 

E 
c 

£ 

'5 

e 



.sill 

o~ i3 E El 



.ff E 



< 



qScc 



lis 








D 








9 








m 




d 

z 

o 

HI 

S 

w 


iii 
—i 

P 


w 

Q 
a 


□ 
a 



1 3 _KDU33UKItlU IDSTOdd'BOa'Mda'JSDD Ubr£:0T 86/ 82 AbW 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item Id -File 98-1071 
Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Port 

Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Hearing to consider the release of $132,856.88 in reserved 
funds for the preliminary design of the Hyde Street 
Fishing Harbor. 

$132,856.88 

Loan proceeds from the California Department of Boating 
and Waterways 

On January 7, 1998, the Board of Supervisors 
appropriated $3,500,000 of San Francisco Harbor 
Operating Fund Loan Revenue to fund the costs for the 
design and construction of the Hyde Street Fishing 
Harbor (File 101-97-44). Of this amount, $3,200,000 was 
placed on reserve pending selection of contractors. 

The Attachment, submitted by the Department of Public 
Works, lists the separate components of the project. This 
request would authorize the release of $132,856.88 to 
fund the preliminary design of the Hyde Street Fishing 
Harbor. The majority of the work would be performed by 
the DPW with the exception of some geotechnical work 
being performed by Transpacific Geotechnical 
Consultants, Inc. (see Comment 2). The work would be 
divided between the DPW and the consultant as follows 
(further details are provided in the Attachment): 

Name Amount 

DPWs Bureau of Architecture $91,130.00 
Transpacific Geotechnical 

Consultants Inc. 31,500.00 
DPWs Bureau of Construction 

Management 10.226.88 

Total $132,856.88 



Budget: 



The Attachment, submitted by DPW, is a project budget, 
totaling $132,856.88, which contains the expenditure 
details, including the hours and hourly rates for the 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

contractor and details of in-house costs, for the 
preliminary design of the Hyde Street Fishing Harbor. 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Carleen Ho of the Port, the 

preliminary design work for the Hyde Street Fishing 
Harbor commenced in January 1998 and is expected to be 
completed by October 1998. Ms. Ho anticipates that the 
bid process for the construction work will commence in 
October/November 1998. The construction work is 
anticipated to commence in March 1999 and be completed 
by October 1999. 

2. Transpacific Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. is on 
contract with the DPWs Bureau of Engineering on an as 
needed basis. Ms. Susan Yee, of the DPW, advises that 
the DPW has a list of four consultants who contract with 
the Department for geotechnical services on an as needed 
basis, and work is rotated amongst the four consultants. 

3. Ms. Ho advises that approximately $101,399 of the 
requested total of $132,856.88 have already been 
expended without the prior approval of the Board of 
Supervisors. These funds have been expended as follows: 

Amount Work Performed Bv* 

$78,992 DPWs Bureau of Architecture 

$12,181 Transpacific Geotechnical 

Consultants Inc. 
$10,226 DPWs Bureau of Construction 

Management 

* Work details provided in the Attachment. 

Ms. Ho believes that this work commenced in 
approximately January 1998 and is ongoing. The work 
was being mistakenly funded by monies taken from a 
release of reserved funds totaling $270,300. approved by 
the Board of Supervisors in January, 1998. The Board 
approved the release of these funds for concept design 
work on the Hyde Street Fishing Harbor by Concept 
Marine Associates, totaling approximately $240,000 and 
for dredging work on the project by the DPWs Bureau of 
Construction Management, totaling approximately 
$30,300. Concept Marine Associates completed 30 percent 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

of the design work (totaling approximately $72,000) and 
$101,399.88 of remaining funds was then mistakenly 
drawn upon by the DPW for the design and construction 
work described in the Attachment. Both the release of 
reserved funds of $270,300 and the current request of 
$132,856 are sourced from $3.5 million in loan proceeds 
from the California Department of Boating and 
Waterways. 

Ms. Ho advises that when this mistake was discovered in 
late April 1998, the Port then attempted to obtain the 
approval of the Board of Supervisors for the release of 
reserved funds totaling $132,856.88. Ms. Ho reports that 
the Port was unable to have this item calendered prior to 
completion of the Board of Supervisors budget hearings. 

4. Repayments on the $3.5 million loan proceeds provided 
by the California Department of Boating and Waterways, 
are to commence on August 1, 2000 and due in 2028, with 
repayment to be made from gross revenues originating 
from fees and rentals charged and received by the Port for 
services, facilities and leaseholds provided or located with 
the Hyde Street Fishing Harbor. The interest rate is 4.5 
percent per annum on the unpaid balance commencing 
with the date of each transfer of loan funds by the State. 

Recommendation: Approval of the release of reserved funds totaling 

$132,856.88 is a policy matter for the Board of 
Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Attachment 



(Page 1 of 1 ) 



DPW - Bureau of Architecture (BOA) 
Work performed by: BOA Staff 

Scope of Services 



11/20/96 



List of 
Drawings/Scope 



Description 



No. of 

Dwgs Hours 



Rate 



5. Existing 

Conditions/Demolition Floor 
Plans 



Office/Storage Bldg includes a Partial 
Bldg Demo and Re-Enclosing of 
Bldgs, 4 Exterior Bldg Elevations. 2 
Bldg Sections 



136 81.25 



Fee 



1 


Overall Site Plan 




l 68 


81 25 


S5. 525.00 


J 


Site Details 


Ramps, Disaoility Signage, Street 
Furniture, Lighting, Fencing, Bollards, 
Etc. 


1 68 


81.25 


S5.525.00 


.3 


Birdseve Perspective 


Sketcn 


1 68 


81.25 


S5.525.00 


4. 


Site Plans 


ParKing Lots including car space 
striping (dimensions), Disability 
Access, signs, street furniture 


1 68 


81.25 


$5,525.00 



S1 1.050.00 



6. Office/Storaqe Blda 



Structural floor and/or Root Plan, 
Reflected Ceiling Plan/Lighting, 
Electrical/Mechanical Plan, Structural 
Sections, New Exterior Elevations, 
Architectural Details 



136 81.25 



S1 1.050.00 



Floor Plan/Pier Plan, Structural 
Framing Plan/Roof Plan, Section - 
Structural Bldg Sections. 4 Bldg 
Elevations, Plumbing Plan. Reflected 
Ceiling Plan/Lighting, Elec/Mech 
Floor Plans, Interior Elevations/ADA 



7. New Toilet Bldq 


Requirements. Architectural D 


etails 


3 


204 


81.25 


S16.575.00 


8. Specifications 








176 


81.25 


SU.300.00 


9. Meetings. Coordination 
with Consultants/Port 








Si 


152 77 


S8.555.00 



10. 10% Handling Charge. 
Management/Reporting/Re 
view and Coordination of 
Documents, Agency 
Questions not including 
meetings 



S7. 500.00 
S91. 130.00 



17 



Attachment 



(Page 2 of 3) 



DPW - Bureau of Engineering (BOE) 

Work performed by: Transpacific Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. 

Scope of Services 



11/27/96 



List of 
Drawings/Scope 



Description 



Hours 



Rate 



Fee 



1. Geotechnical Engineering - 

Field Exploration Permit and Inspection Fee 

Drilling Contractor (Including 
handling and mobilization 
charges 

Field Engineer includes 
sampling equipment and vehicle 



10 100.00 51,000.00 



S6.500.00 



25 80.00 S2. 000.00 



2. Geotechnical Engineering - 

Office Support Laboratory Testing 25 

Engineering Analysis and Report 
Preparation 105 



40.00 S1, 000.00 

100.00 S1 0,500.00 



3. Coastal Engineering 



Charles I. Rauw, Consultant 
Including handling charges 



S4, 255.00 



4. Services During 
Construction 



Attend Construction Meetings, 
Review and answer questions 
during construction 



40 



100.00 S4.000.00 



5. DPW Handling Charge 
10% 



S2.245.00 
531,500.00 



Attachment 



(Page 3 of 3) 



DPW - Bureau of Construction Management (BCM) 
Work performed by: BCM Staff 
Scope of Services 



2/25/97 



List of 










Drawings/Scope 


Description 


Hours 


Rate 


Fee 


1 . Topographic and 










Hydrographic Survey 










Drawings for the Hyde 


Survey the Site and 








Street Harbor 


Prepare Drawings 


10 


79.15 


$791.54 






52 


62.02 


S3. 224. 77 






64 


53.44 


S3. 420.08 






16 


45.70 


S731.14 






55 


36.77 


S2.059.35 








I 


S10.226.88 



19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item le - File 98-1069 



Department: 



Item: 



Water Department 

Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Resolution approving the expenditure of funds for 
operational costs, watershed damage and water treatment 
costs associated with the El Nino storms. 



Amount: 
Source of funds: 
Description: 



$1,100,614 

Water Department's Unappropriated Fund Balance 

This resolution would authorize the expenditure of funds 
totaling $1,100,614 for El Nino storm related emergency 
work, including: 

(a) emergency operation of valves and patrolling of San 
Mateo Creek and Pilarcitos Creek in order to control 
Peninsula Reservoirs and minimize flood damage to 
nearby businesses, residences, schools and hospitals; 

(b) emergency water treatment operations; 

(c) repair of roads, culverts, debris basins and East Bay 
and Peninsula watershed lands damaged during 
storms; 

(d) removal of fallen trees from Peninsula and East Bay 
watersheds; and 

(e) emergency evaluation of chemical feed upgrades and 
improvements at the Harry Tracy Treatment Plant 
and Crystal Springs Pump Station to effectively and 
reliably treat high rate flows during periods of 
elevated raw water turbidity. 

As a result of the El Nino storms between January and 
March of 1998, which damaged various Water 
Department facilities located in the East Bay and the 
Peninsula, the PUC declared an emergency on February 
27, 1998. The emergency was declared in order to 
expedite repairs required as a result of the damage and 
endangerment to various Water Department facilities 
including, reservoirs, watershed lands and infrastructure. 
In accordance with Administrative Code Section 6.30, the 
PUC expedited contract procedures in order to commence 
the repair work. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Budget: 



Comment: 



Recommendation: 



A summary budget provided by the Water Department is 
as follows: 

Labor Costs (incurred by the Water Department | 

Peninsula Watershed $1,108 

Alameda Watershed 552 

Emergency Reservoir Operations/ 
Monitoring of Crystal Springs Bypass 103,313 
Emergency Water Treatment 641 

Watershed and Road Repair 700,000 

Chemical Feed Upgrades and Improvements 295.000 
Total $1,100,614 

Attachment I, provided by Ms. Cheryl Davis of the Water 
Department, contains a description and related costs for 
each component of these projects, totaling $1,100,614. 

1 Attachment II provided by Mr. Joe Naras of the PUC's 
Water Supply and Treatment Division contains the 
estimated costs and estimated completion dates for the 
Watershed and Road Repair projects, totaling $700,000. 
Mr Naras advises that the PUC is presently obtaining 
bids for Watershed and Road Repair projects from 
contractors and expects to award contracts by July 31, 
1998. Mr. Naras reports that the continuing wet weather 
and difficulties experienced by the PUC in finding 
available contractors to complete the Watershed and Road 
Repair project- has contributed to the delay in 
commencing this work. 

'1. The Chemical Feed Upgrades and Improvements 
project involved obtaining design work for two water 
treatment upgrades: (a) a facility which could be used to 
pre-treat Crystal Springs Reservoir water prior to 
transferring it to San Andreas Reservoir, and (b) an 
upgrade to the chemical feed system at the Harry Tracy 
Treatment Plant to improve its ability to treat high- 
turbidity water. Attachment III, provided by Mr. 
Manoucher Boozarpour of the PUC's Water Quality 
Bureau, contains a description of each project, the date 
that the work began for each project and the estimated 
date of completion for the $295,000 total, for the Chemical 
Feed Upgrades and Improvements projects. 

Approve the proposed resolution. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 





to 
























cu 




































5 












CO 

u 












5 E 












jE 












■8 -a 












"5 

.re 












o * 












i— 












CO u> 












TO 












o 2 












03 












cu re 












CO 












CD _>» 












TO 

E 












O o 


































C3 












~ c 












~~ 












v. :c 












-a 
o 












o re 
























S 3 = 












"*CO 












.E o 












U 








N 




o *H 












"re 












— CU 












> 


































c 8 












o 












o u 

E « 












cu 

CO 
CS 




Ed 








co" cu 
4J jo 












E 




— 








■£ T3 




3 








a 
to 




s 


CO 


<N 




re — 

> 3 

o IS 




5 








IE" 




2 


o 


en 




E re 




Z 


r-i 






CS 

C 

u 




Ed 
P5 


V5 


go 
en 

< 


O CU 

2 ■*■» 

u E 

a. es 


o 
o 


tsl 

— 
X 


O 






•o 




Ed 






£ 


o 


K 








3 










>■ 


° re 


^d 










to 










C5 


CO* ~ 


a 
cu 










.E 










172 


CU <l) 


■"" 










CO 

o 










z 


> l- 

CU 3 
CO 


■— 










re 










1 


o " 


CO 










.= 










t/3 
< 

H 

GO 
> 

U 


Z 2 


re 

JO 










c_ 










o — 

CO CU 


_>> 










CS 










cu T3 

c*. O 


u 

E 




















° E 

to — 


re 










C3 










.E "*""" 
o J 


5 




















~ c£ 


-a 




















fc. 




CU 




?s 






'« 










o 


O 3 


a. 
c 




"5 








s 

c 
re 

CO 

E 
_o 

ea 










z 

5 
o 


E E 
= 5 

co "o 

eu C- 

E ra 
E ° 


o 
o 

JO 

o 




I 

CO 






cu 
c_ 
o 
•a 










o 


"n. b 

c .~ 

re <u 


> 

o 




"a 






re 










55 
z 


re ~ 


eu 




i 






•a 

u 

"co 
U 










o 
p 




re 
> 

re 




o 


z 




re 


CO 








Ed 


2 E 

re i- 


3 




eg 

o 


Ed 

Ed 

2 




JO 

"O 
U 

C 

o 

c 


5! 

re 
JO 
t/1 




§ 


tl 


o 

g 

o 
> 


!**■ a. 
>* • - 

-a f 


C 
O 

o 




G 

^ 
a 




JO 
U 

— 




cu 

1 

,55 

5 


Si 
cu 


t, re 
CJ L - 


-a 
re 
O 
C4 






td 


P 

Ed 


9 
u 

CO 
CO 

O 
o 


"S3 

re 

■a 

re 

a 




1 
i 

— 


Ed 

(73 

Ed 

> 


•— u 

cu C 

§ J 


CO 

E 

o 

"o 




cu 
cu 

1 


< 

> 
U 


w 




- 




5; 


.§ 


z 


s -5 






c 

J 


z 


Gfl 


O 

jo 
re 


u 




a, 


^ 


Ed 


» B 


ra 




Ed 


« 


CJ 








o 


B 




O 


Ed 
P 
< 


o 

CO 

u 


B 
U 

5 




< 


as 


Ed 

S 


^ -a 
g re 

h a. 


cu 
_> 

re 

> 
re 




•1 


S 

Ed 


>— < 












M 








?? 


--—1 



,S E 



re E 



^ O 



< 



5 E 



E- < 



"3- ~- 



h, 



ec; 







* 




















-,- ^ 




















Q 5 

fa fa 


* 


* 


* 


# 


* 


* 




5 § 

5 o 

fa «> 






















00 w 


















CJ 


* 


' 


: 


s 


= 


: 








c 




















O 
















CJ 




















fa ' 

is 




o 
o 
o 
o" 
o 

fee 


O 

o \ 

o 
o" 
in 


o 
o 

o_ 
o 

o 


o 
o 
o_ 
o" 
tn 


CO 

o 
o_ 
o* 
ri 


o 
o 
o_ 
o" 
p- 


o 
o 
o_ 
o" 
o 


o 
o 
q 
o" 
o 
t» 


C/j 




















fa 


























_ 




















<A E 




E 


CJ 


CJ 












o ;; 




o 




CJ 












to £ 


cj 






re 


o 








o 


."2 a 


cj 

re 

OL 




> 

eo 


Q. 

CJ 


CO 

C 








t 


- ^_ 


CJ 


o 


■-: 


■a 


u 








> 


% t 




O 


CO 

o 


re 


o 

CO 












c 


— 




CJ 













O 




« 


CJ 












"3 


B 


re 




"3 








re 


o _— 


cj 




O 




CJ 








To 




-3 


*— 


■a 


4 - 


















re 


-3 




z: 

O 




re 


■g c 


re 
> 


5 

c 


CJ .= 


C 


re 

2 




H 

fa 




-o 

C3 


■s 5 

5 ° 


re 


C 


_ "cj 
2 c_ 


CJ 


'— CO 




2 

u 




O c 

Z -2 


£0 -o 


cj 


— 
re 
o 


E 1 


— re 

O 




fa 
Q 




J2 cj 

09 _ 


C3 — 

O — 


u 

CO = 


1 


— re 
— > 
CJ > 


£ o 












£ 5 


ja 




o C 


O .T 








C re 


CO S 
3 o 


o 


Ji E. 


"E ■*< 


cj ^: 

CJ CJ 








= E o 


cj >- d. 

co CJ re 

re T3 i- 


o cj 


t) 




re -J 

CJ — 

E £• 










° S el 

> S h" 


w iH "= 
re — > 
,- O -* 


"5 o 
£ ■£ 


re 
u 


J" "Si 


're re 

<— CJ 

— £ 


— - CO 

re ~ 

£ | 








£ N CJ 


| |a 


i S 


t/s c 


° '-5 

"3 CJ 


"3 U 




"re 
O 






6 "re E 


£ o | 


g > 

re — 


re ^ 


re "X 
O g 


re > 

a "= 


< % 






Ci n Co 


w u o. 


O o 


- " E - 


2i Q. 


— u 


fa 
















— ' 










J3 










est 










C>> 


~ 








c 
































u 








re 










_ 


e 


— s 






Q 






Z 


& 

°3 


O 


r; 


2 


•S 


■8 


CJ 






o 

fa 
< 


E 
co 
u 
c/j 

O — 
- U 

a - 

re co 
^ 1 


< 

CO 


■o .S 

- 5 

cj -~I 


re 


5 


O 

"3 
CJ 


CJ 




o 


en 


o 
re 


CJ 

re 


CJ 

re 


CJ 

re 






%> 


S 


- ° 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 








■ .a 


re 


re 


re 


re 


re 






5 

i 


-a = 
u ■ - 

E £ 


cj 


5 *" 
— *^, 


1 


1 


c 


1 






C3 N — ' 




= -S^ 


'E 












< 


< 


^^ 




CJ 


CJ 


CJ 






< 


-' 


oi 


r-i 


■^r 


in 23 


o 


p^ 





^ 2 



\ 



g-g 




* 


* 




z u 




C 


C 




3 « 






3 






u. 


u. 




5 9 




co 


a to 






a c 


C - E 




fc" 




P* u 


u 








Q. 

o 


a. 
O 




pi C 










w a 








e 






o 


o 


o 
© 


1 P 




o 
"1 


o 


v7 


C/3 - ": 




o 


00 


6^ 


w v- 




W 










J CO 

Eb-E 

S "§ 

b c 

2 -2 
— 13 

co "- 
.E u 


o 

"3 

o 




o : 




x J> 








o o 


£ .= 




H 4 




O D- 


— o 




ft. 




ls> ."2 


5 & 








O "c3 


•— o 




« 




-a u. 






U 




c o 2 


J s 

O b 




en 

a - 




co — •— 
3 ti i 
o « 5 








^_ o 

o « '« 


.1? 




















*■* CC 








2 ±> 5 


-4 en 








^ o o 

C3 CL O 


■5 b 








> c 
^•5 -g 


> c_> 
>> o 








H ~ ra 


o w 








c = 


B c 








on 1 " 


<U 4> 








E? a E 


E? E 
















o to H 


u E 


C3 






E 5 ■» 

M o >, 


^- C3 








B o 


O 
























■^ 


C 


o 






5 


C3 

a. 


« 




z. : 


6j 


^j 


oo 







■Si 


c 
o 


c 




H / 


Is. 


E 


E 




§ 








< 


C3 


ft, 




u 


s^ 


C/5 




o 


*« Si 


o 

C3 


co 
c 

c 

00 






■^ ^ 


H 








1 s 


b 


"to 






"5 9 


cs 


b 






*• &■ 


X 


U 






8 •! 


— ' 


ri 






=q 











3 




cO 




QJ 




V) 




3 




CQ 




>. 




W 




•H 


<n 


H 


«J 


cd 




3 


«l 


C 


?. 




4 

v. 


5-i 

4-> 


^ 


cO 


t 


3 










G 




»» 


ca 


<U 


c 


"5; 


3 



<io x^^o 




o. jo 
T) c 



lite 



■ 


1= 






C 


V 


E 


i 





c 


- 


n 


fc 


o 








■ 




_ 




8 


■ 


a 


J= 


'5. 


0) 

II 


'J 
I 


— 


-: 


*u 


— 








!2 I 



.2 



— 2 



.2 ir 

IT 
in £: 




TOTAL P. 02 



25 



JUL-02-1998 li:i8 



SFWD WATER QUALITY 



650 371 2006 P. 02/02 



o 
> 

fid 



Work 

Completed 

By 


2 

s 


3 


Project 

Completion 

Date 


00 

ON 

CO 


00 

on 
& 


s « 


00 

ON 

1 

u 


00 

ON 

1 


en 

O 

O 

s 

1 


o 
o 

Oo" 

00 


© 
o 

in 

NO~ 
O 
CN 


c 

■s 

u 

EQ 

u 




Recommend and provide design for 
treatment options at the Crystal 
Springs Pump Station to allow for 
the pre-treatment of Crystal Springs 
Reservoir water 


Evaluate and provide 
recommendation for upgrading 
primary coagulant and coagulant-aid 
injection/mixing system at the 
HTWTP 


c 
o 

■a 

eo 
o 
o 
J 


VI 

00 

a 
■2 

Q. u 

& s 

U K 


« — 
& c 



TOTAL P. 02 



26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 2 -File 98-1066 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Source of funds: 

Description: 



Airport 

Resolution approving the issuance of up to $1,400,000,000 
aggregate principal amount of San Francisco 
International Airport Second Series Revenue Refunding 
Bonds for the purpose of refinancing certain outstanding 
Revenue Bonds of the Airport Commission issued for the 
purpose of financing or refinancing certain capital 
improvements at San Francisco International Airport; 
approving the maximum interest rate thereon; approving 
the time for sale of Refunding Bonds no later than 
December 31, 2001; and approving a maximum number of 
issues and final maturity date of the sale of Refunding 
Bonds of not later than May 1, 2032. 

Not to exceed $1,400,000,000 

San Francisco International Airport Second Series 
Revenue Refunding Bonds 

Section 4.115 of the Charter grants the Airport 
Commission the authority to issue Airport Revenue Bonds 
for Airport related purposes, subject to the approval of the 
Board of Supervisors. Section 2.62 of the Administrative 
Code provides that such Revenue Bonds shall bear a rate 
of interest not to exceed that rate which may be set by the 
Airport Commission, subject to the approval of the Board 
of Supervisors. The Airport Commission has set a not to 
exceed interest rate of 12 percent in accordance with 
State bond regulations. The Airport is requesting 
approval of the issuance of up to $1,400,000,000 in 
Airport Revenue Refunding Bonds for the purpose of (1) 
refinancing not more than $1,000,000,000 in outstanding 
San Francisco International Airport Second Series 
Revenue Bonds ("1991 Resolution Bonds"), (2) refinancing 
not more than $400,000,000 in outstanding San Francisco 
International Airport Second Series Subordinate Bonds 
("Subordinate Bonds")*, and (3) funding debt service 
reserves and paying costs of issuance, including 
redemption premiums and other incidental costs. 

*Revenue Bonds 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



27 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

The proposed resolution would authorize the Mayor, the 
Treasurer and other City officials to take the necessary 
actions to issue and sell not more than $1,400,000,000 in 
San Francisco International Airport Second Series 
Revenue Refunding Bonds in order to refund 
approximately $1,300,000,000 in outstanding bond 
obligations of the Airport. As a condition of issuing the 
proposed Revenue Refunding Bonds, the Airport would be 
required to realize debt service savings which are at least 
equal to one percent of the principal amount of the 
Revenue Refunding Bonds (see Comment 1). This request 
authorizes $1,400,000,000 in Refunding Bonds, or 
$100,000,000 more than the Revenue Bonds of 
$1,300,000,000 which the Airport plans to utilize because 
Refunding Bond proceeds are invested in US Treasury 
securities, which earn less interest than the interest that 
must be paid on the outstanding bonds prior to their 
redemption. Thus the estimated amount of Refunding 
Bonds issued is larger than the amount of bonds that are 
refunded so that the total sources of funds (Refunding 
Bond proceeds and interest earnings) will equal the 
original bond proceeds and interest earnings. 

The proposed resolution would also extend the Airport's 
TEFRA authorization. Section 147(f) of the Internal 
Revenue Code, originally enacted as part of the Tax 
Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA"), 
requires the approval of the Board of Supervisors or the 
Mayor, for each project proposed to be financed by an 
issue of Revenue Bonds of the type proposed under this 
resolution. The current TEFRA approval for the Airport 
Commission's Near Term Master Plan program expires on 
August 22, 1998, and tax laws require that the Airport 
have a current TEFRA approval prior to this proposed 
bond sale. The proposed resolution would extend the 
Airport's TEFRA approval for another three years. 

Comment: 1. The Airport estimates that it would realize total 

estimated savings of $26,131,089 in reduced debt service 
costs over the next 28 years as a result of initially issuing 
$500,000,000 of the proposed $1,400,000,000 Revenue 
Refunding Bonds, based on an interest rate of 
approximately 5.0-5.25 percent on the Refunding Bonds 
as compared to the existing average interest rate of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Juh r 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



approximately 5.9 percent on the presently outstanding 
bonds. As previously noted, as a condition of issuing the 
proposed Refunding Bonds, the Airport would be required 
to realize debt service savings which are at least equal to 
one percent of the principal amount of the Revenue Bonds 
which would be refunded. The estimated $26,131,089 in 
reduced debt service costs equals approximately 5.2 
percent of the principal amount $500,000,000 to be issued 
at this time. Mr. Kuo advises that the Airport proposes to 
issue the remainder of $900,000,000 of the $1,400,000,000 
Refunding Bonds when the Airport can document that 
additional savings would be realized by paying off the 
existing bonds. The Attachment provided by Mr. Kuo 
documents that the Airport would realize total estimated 
savings of $26,131,089 over a 28-year term by issuing 
$500,000,000 of Refunding Bonds at this time. 

2. According to Mr. Kuo, the estimated cost of issuing the 
proposed Revenue Refunding Bonds, including fees for 
private bond counsel and financial advisors will be $6 
million and will be paid from Bond proceeds. Mr. Kuo 
advises that such costs would be subject to separate 
appropriation approval of the Board of Supervisors. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



JUL. 8.1998 10:52AM 



ATTACHMENT 




FfftCAL YEAR 



1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2016 

2019 

2020 

2021 

2022 

2023 

2024 

2025 

2026 



AVERAGE 
ANNUAL 
DEBT SERVICE 
FY99-2026 

ESTIMATED 
TOTAL SAVINGS 



ESTIMATED 
DEBT SERVICE 



$132,792,000 

3175,577,000 

$216,436,000 

$242,554,000 

$259,624,000 

$270,039,000 

$281,578,000 

$281,774,000 

$294,445,000 

$294,529,000 

$294,715,000 

$295,234,000 

$295,369,000 

$295,572,000 

$293,907,000 

$264,944,000 

$285,476,000 

$285,707,000 

$285,980,000 

$286,252,000 

$286,544,000 

$284,082,000 

$270,545,000 

$270,954,000 

$271,502,000 

$269,647,000 

$253,699,000 

$214,430,000 



$266,925,250 



EST. SAVINGS 

FROM INITIAL 

REFUNPJNGiJl 



$3,327,951 
SB72.214 
$870,541 
$868,041 
$874,101 
$670,679 
$868,989 
$374,286 
$672,703 
$873,673 
S677,528 
$875,308 
$676,210 
SB71.380 
$881,410 
$872,598 
$881,655 
$879,198 
$876,498 
$877,648 
$882,348 
$882,685 
$882,711 
$886,212 
$887,589 
$882,794 
$883,939 
$0 



$26,131,089 



EST. DEBT 
SERVICE AFTER 
INITIAL REFUNDING 



$129,464,049 

$174,704,786 

$215,565,459 

$241,685,959 

$258,749,899 

$269,168,321 

$280,709,011 

$280,B99,714 

$293,572,297 

S293,655,127 

$293,837,472 

S294, 358,692 

$294,492,790 

$294,700,620 

$293,025,590 

$284,071,402 

$284,594,345 

$264,827,802 

$285,103,502 

$285,374,352 

$285,661,652 

$283,199,315 

$269,662,289 

$270,067,788 

$270,614,411 

$268,764,206 

$252,815,061 

$214,430,000 



$265,991,997 



t1] ASSUMES SAVINGS FROM A $500 MILLION REFUNDING AT CURRENT INTEREST RATES 

-'These calculations are based on the issue of $500 million Refundine Bonds. 
30yrds.wk4 



07/06/98 



30 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items 3 and 4 - Files 98-934 and 98-935 

Note: These items were continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
8, 1998. 

Department: Department of Human Services (DHS) 

Item: Item 3 File 98-934: Resolution approving a contract 

between the City and Addus HealthCare for the provision of 
In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) for the three year 
period from August 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001, with an option 
to renew for one additional year, in the amount of 
$14,888,844. 

Item 4 File 98-935: Resolution approving a contract 
between the City and the IHSS Consortium of San Francisco 
for the provision of IHSS for the period from August 1, 1998 
to June 30, 2001, with an option to renew for one additional 
year, in the amount of $16,132,813. 



Contract Amounts: 



Addus HealthCare 
IHSS Consortium 
Total 



$14,888,844 

16.132.813 

$31,021,657 



Source of Funds: 



Description: 



General Fund monies included in DHS's FY 
1998-99 budget and to be included in the FY 
1999-2000 and FY 2000-2001 budgets $ 9,306,497 

Federal and State Medicaid Funds included in 
DHS's FY 1998-99 budget and to be included in 
the FY 1999-2000 and FY 2000-2001 budgets 21.715.160 
Total $31,021,657 

In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) is an entitlement 
program which provides funding for low-income seniors and 
disabled people to receive non-medical personal care and 
other household assistance in their homes from visiting 
workers. IHSS care can allow seniors and disabled persons 
to remain in their own homes and thereby avoid unnecessary 
and expensive hospitalization or institutionalization. 

IHSS workers function either as (a) independent providers; 
(b) through a contract between DHS and the IHSS 
Consortium, which consists of non-profit providers of 
services; or (c) through a contract between DHS and Addus 
HealthCare, a private provider of services. The total annual 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



IHSS hours provided by these three IHSS providers is 
approximately 7,270,000. Under the proposed contracts, the 
total annual IHSS hours of 7,270,000 would be distributed as 
follows: (a) independent providers - approximately 90 
percent, or 6,520,000 hours; (b) IHSS Consortium - 
approximately five percent or 375,000 hours; and (c) Addus 
HealthCare - approximately five percent or 375,000 hours. 

In 1994 the Board of Supervisors approved two contracts for 
IHSS services, one with the IHSS Consortium and one with 
Addus HealthCare, for the period from July 1, 1994 to June 
30, 1997, with an option to renew for one year (Resolution 
688-94). According to Ms. Julie Murray Brenman of DHS, a 
one month extension of the two contracts, to July 31, 1998, 
was approved by the Human Services Commission on June 
25, 1998, due to a delay in receiving contract rate approval 
by the State. The proposed resolutions would authorize new 
contracts with the IHSS Consortium (File 98-935) and Addus 
HealthCare (File 98-934) for the period from August 1, 1998 
to June 30, 2001, with an option to renew for one additional 
year. 

Under the proposed contracts, IHSS Consortium and Addus 
HealthCare contract employees will receive health and other 
benefits as well as sick, vacation, and holiday benefits. The 
following table shows the proposed hourly rates, estimated 
number of hours and estimated total amount to be paid to 
each of the contractors. The hourly rates include wages paid 
to IHSS workers, benefits, training, travel, insurance and 
administrative costs. 

Addus HealthCare IHSS Consortium 



FY 1998-99 






Hourly rate 


S13.5878 


S14.75 


Estimated # of hours* 


343,750 


343,750 


Total amount 


$4,670,806 


S5.070.313 


FY 1999-2000 






Hourly rate 


S13.6235 


S14.75 


Estimated # of hours 


375.000 


375,000 


Total amount 


S5.108.813 


$5,531,250 


FY 2000-01 






Hourly rate 


S13.6246 


S14.75 


Estimated # of hours 


375,000 


375,000 


Total amount 


S5.109.225 


S5. 531. 250 



This represents prorated hours for the 11-month period from August 1, 1998 through 
June 30, 1999 (based on the annualized amount of 375.000 hours). 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

The proposed FY 1998-99 hourly rate of $13.5878 for Addus 
HealthCare is $0.1522 per hour lower, or a 1.1 percent 
decrease, over the FY 1997-98 rate of $13.74. The proposed 
FY 1998-99 hourly rate of $14.75 for the IHSS Consortium is 
$1.01 higher, or a 7.4 percent increase over the FY 1997-98 
rate of $13.74. According to Ms. Brenman, these changes in 
the FY 1998-99 hourly rates are due to a redistribution of 
hours between the two contractors. Ms. Brenman advises 
that, under the current contracts, the IHSS Consortium 
provides 150,000 hours of services and Addus HealthCare 
provides 600,000 hours of services. Under the proposed 
contracts, the IHSS Consortium and Addus HealthCare 
would each provide 343,750 hours of services in FY 1998-99 
(375,000 hours on an annualized basis). As a result of the 
relative increase in the number of hours required under the 
IHSS Consortium contract, Addus HealthCare employees 
(who are paid at a higher rate than IHSS Consortium 
employees) are being shifted to the IHSS Consortium 
contract, thereby resulting in a higher hourly rate for IHSS 
Consortium and a lower hourly rate for Addus HealthCare. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Anthony Nicco of DHS advises that, in February of 

1998, DHS issued two separate request for proposals (RFPs) 
for the subject IHSS services, one for non-profit service 
providers and one for private and other providers. According 
to Mr. Nicco, only one firm, the IHSS Consortium, responded 
to the RFP for non-profits. DHS received two responses to 
the RFP for private and other providers. Mr. Nicco reports 
that Addus HealthCare submitted a bid of $13.61 per hour. 
Although another firm, AJC Services, submitted a lower bid 
of $13.56 per hour, AJC Services' proposal received a lower 
overall score from an independent review panel than Addus 
HealthCare's proposal, according to Mr. Nicco. Mr. Nicco 
advises that Addus Health Care's hourly rate of $13.61 
represents the composite rate over the three year period of 
the contract. 

2. The contract with Addus HealthCare specifies that it 
shall not exceed a maximum amount of $14,888,844 over the 
three year period of the contract. The contract with the IHSS 
Consortium specifies that it will not exceed $16,132,813 over 
the three year period of the contract. 

3. Mr. Nicco advises that the funding to provide health care 
benefits to IHSS workers contained in the Mayor's proposed 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

FY 1998-99 budget is for independent IHSS workers only. 
IHSS workers employed under contract with Addus 
HealthCare and the IHSS Consortium receive health care 
benefits provided by those employers. Similarly, the hourly 
wage increase from $6.65 to $7.00 per hour, proposed by the 
Finance Committee in the FY 1998-99 budget, is for 
independent IHSS workers only. Mr. Xicco reports that 
wage rates for IHSS workers employed under contract with 
Addus HealthCare and the IHSS Consortium are set through 
separate union negotiations. 

Recommendation: Based on the representations of DHS that only one firm, the 
IHSS Consortium, responded to the RFP for nonprofit 
providers and that Addus Health Care received the highest 
overall score among the private providers, approve the 
proposed resolutions. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 5 -File 98-1062 



Department: 
Item: 



Trial Courts 

Ordinance setting schedules of compensation and other 
economic benefits for FY 1998-99 for certain 
classifications of persons employed by the Municipal 
Court. 



Description: 



The proposed ordinance would fix compensation for FY 
1998-99 for 13 classifications, covering 167 positions, of 
persons employed by the Municipal Court. The proposed 
ordinance, which relates to employees who are not 
represented by an employee organization, would be 
adopted pursuant to the California Government Code 
Section 74504.5, and would establish conditions of 
employment and methods of payment. 

The Municipal Court employees covered by the proposed 
ordinance are as follows: 



Classification 


Current No. of Positions 


215 Bail Commissioner 


1 


255 Court Commissioner 


3 


280 Deputy Clerk 


37 


285 Executive Secretary 


1 


287 Administrative Secretary 


1 


289 Personnel and Payroll 


1 


290 Deputy Clerk 


22 


293 Interpreter Coordinator 


1 


297 Deputy Clerk 


1 


320 Deputy Clerk 


27 


330 Deputy Clerk 


69 


342 Information Clerk Supervisor 


1 


340 Information Clerk 


2 


Total 


167 


Waee Increases 





The proposed ordinance would provide wage increases 
totaling 3.25 percent for FY 1998-99, retroactively to July 
1, 1998, to all covered employees except for classes 215 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Bail Commissioner and 255 Court Commissioner, based 
on the following schedule: 



Date 

July 1, 1998 
December 26, 1998 
Total 



Percent Wage Increase 
1.75 percent 
1.50 percent 
3.25 percent 



All employees in the classifications of the 215 Bail 
Commissioner and 255 Court Commissioner, effective 
'July 1, 1998, shall be paid the same salary rate as that 
paid to Superior Court Commissioners in classes 620 and 
621, which amounts to 85% of the rate paid to Superior 
Court Judges. The resulting wage increases are an 
increase of $7,922, or 9.5 percent for the 215 Bail 
Commissioner, from $83,360 to $91,282 and an increase of 
$12,826, or 16.3 percent for 255 Court Commissioners 
from $78,456 to $91,282. 



Comments: 



1. As shown in the Attachment, the Controller's office 
estimates that the subject proposed ordinance will result 
in estimated incremental costs of approximately $237,000 
for FY 1998-99 and ongoing incremental costs of 
approximately $277,000. The Controllers office advises 
that these are State costs and not General Fund costs. 
The Budget Analyst concurs with the Controller's cost 
estimate. 



2. The proposed ordinance has been approved by a 
majority of the Judges of the Municipal Court. California 
Government Code Section 74504.5 state that "Rates of 
compensation of all officers and assistants and other 
compensation of all officers and assistants and other 
employees may be altered by joint action and approval of 
the Board of Supervisors and a majority of the judges of 
the court." 



Recommendation: 



Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



PAGE 

ATTACHMENT 1 of 2 



1 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLEE 



Edward Haningtoi 
Controllei 

John W. Maddei 
Chief Assistant Controliei 



My 9, 1998 



Mr. John L. Taylor, Clerk of the Board 
Board of Supervisors 
401 Van Ness Avenue 
San Francisco, C A 94 1 02 



RE: Ordinance Setting Compensation for Municipal Court Classifications 
File No. 98-1062 

Dear Mr. Taylor: 

In accordance with Ordinance 92-94, I am submitting a cost analysis of an ordinance setting compensation 
tor certain Municipal Court classifications. The ordinance covers the period July 1 , 1 998 through June 30 
1 999, and affects approximately 1 67 employees with a salary base of approximately $7.5 million. 

Based on our analysis, the agreement will result in estimated incremental costs of approximately S?37 000 
m FY 1998-99, arid ongoing annual incremental costs of approximately $277,000. The agreement 'will 
result m an annual cost increase for FY 1998-99 of approximately 3.41% above FY l997-98~base salaries 
Please see Attachment A for specific cost estimates. 

If you have any additional questions or concerns please contact John Madden at 554-7500. 
Sincerely, 




'Edward M Harrin 
Controller 



cc: Vicki Rambo, ERD 

Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst 



-654-7500 

S75 Stevenson Street * Room 215 • Sao Francisco CA 94103-0910 



FAX 415-554-7466 

37 



? of 2 



Attachment A 
MunicipaJ Court Employees 
estimated Costs 1998-99 
Controller's Office 



Annual Incremental Co<rrs/(Saving s) FY 1998-99 Ongoing Cost 

Wage Increases 
1.75% on 7/1/98 and 1.5% on 12/266/98 

Interred Adjustment - Commissioners 

Wage-Related Fringe Increases 

Total Estimated Incremental Costs 

Incremental Cost % of Salary Base 3.41% 3.99% 



S191.068 


S225.807 


14.593 


14.593 


31,507 


36.829 


$237,168 


S277.229 



38 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1997 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 6 -File 98-1022 



Department: 
Item: 



Location: 

Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

Lessee: 

No. of Sq. Ft. and 
Cost Per Month: 



Annual Cost: 



Utilities and Janitor 
Provided by Lessee: 



Term of Lease: 
Right of Renewal: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Resolution authorizing an assignment, assumption and 
amendments, including a rent increase, pertaining to an 
existing 40-year lease of Public Utilities Commission land 
located in the City of Santa Clara for parking and 
landscaping from Larvan Properties, assignor, to MELP 
VII, assignee. 

A portion of Parcel 144 of Bay Division Pipeline Nos. 3 
and 4 right of way, in Santa Clara, California. 

To provide space for parking and landscaping to the 
assignee, MELP VII. 

City and County of San Francisco 

Larvan Properties 



The leased parcel is 0.346 acres, or approximately 15,072 
square feet at a current rate of $175.50 per month, or 
approximately $0.0116 per square foot. The proposed 
resolution would amend the lease to increase the monthly 
lease rate to $1,446.92 per month, or $0,096 per square 
foot, an increase of $0.0844 per square foot, or 728 
percent. 

The current annual lease rate is $2,105.92. The proposed 
resolution would amend the lease to increase the annual 
lease rate to $17,363, an increase of $15,257. 



The services to the subject land are currently provided by 
the lessee, Larvan Properties. The subject resolution 
would authorize Larvan Properties to assign the lease to 
MELP VII, who would then be responsible for providing 
all services to the subject land. 

August 1, 1977 through July 31, 2017, 40 years. 

No 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



39 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1997 Finance Committee Meeting 



Description: 



Comments: 



The City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through the Public Utilities Commission, currently leases 
approximately 0.346 acres of land to Larvan Properties, a 
General Partnership, pursuant to a 40 year ground lease. 
The subject land is used for parking and landscaping 
purposes. The tenant, Larvan Properties, has recently 
sold adjacent property to MELP MI, L.P., a California 
limited partnership and has requested consent to 
Assignment of the lease to MELP VII, L.P. (Assignee). 
The subject land would continue to be used for parking 
and landscaping purposes. 

The current lease provides that the base rental will be 
increased or decreased every five years in accordance with 
any increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index 
(CPI). Larvan, as the Assignor, has agreed to 
amendments to the lease, including: (1) an increase in 
the monthly rental rate to reflect fair market value from 
$175.50 per month to $1,446.92 per month (from 
$2,105.92 to $17,363 per year) with annual adjustments 
based on any increase of the CPI, (2) compliance with the 
City's Equal Benefits Ordinance requirements, and (3) 
compliance with the City's Pesticide Ordinance; provided, 
however, the PUC will consent to not unreasonably 
withhold any future assignments or subletting. 

1. The PUC has issued a resolution approving the 
proposed assignment, assumption, and amendment to the 
lease. 



2. The assignment, assumption, and amendment to the 
subject lease became effective on March 13, 1998. As 
such, the proposed resolution should be amended for 
retroactivity. 

3. According to Mr. Gary Dowd of the PLX. the original 
lease rate for the subject property, established in 1977, 
was $756 per year, with adjustments every five years 
based on the CPI, which have brought the lease rate to 
the current $2,105.92 per year. Mr. Dowd reports that 
over the years, the base rent has not reflected fair market 
value. However, the lessee has agreed to the new rent 
with annual CPI increases provided the lease is amended 
to include the statement, "Landlord's consent will not be 
unreasonably withheld in any instance where such 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

40 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1997 Finance Committee Meeting 

consent is required to a proposed assignment, subletting, 
or other transfer of encumbrance of Tenant's interest in 
the lease." Mr. Dowd reports that such an amendment is 
acceptable to the PUC given the fact that the lease has 
been brought up to fair market value and the annual CPI 
adjustments should keep the lease rate at a fair market 
value level. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to provide for retroactivity 

and approve the resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

41 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 7 - File 98-1031 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Public Utilities Commission 

Resolution authorizing the sale of the Public Utilities 
Commission (PUC) surplus real property identified as a 
portion of the Sunol Aqueduct easement located near 
Fremont, Alameda County, California to Mission Clay 
Products Company. 

The proposed resolution would authorize a sale, from the 
PUC to Mission Clay Products, Inc., through the 
execution of a quitclaim deed, of City-owned real property 
in Alameda County consisting of a 1.47 acre easement 
which the PUC had previously declared to be surplus to 
the Water Department's needs. 

The Board of Supervisors previously authorized an 
agreement ("Agreement") between the City, acting 
through the PUC, and Mission Clay Products, Inc. 
("Mission Clay"), (File No. 172-96-5), in April of 1996, 
whereby the City was relieved of its obligation to provide 
water to Mission Clay, through the Sunol Aqueduct, 
which had become uneconomical. The Agreement 
included a provision that the City would fund the 
construction of a water well in the amount of $30,000 on 
Mission Clay's property through a well drilling contractor 
to be hired by Mission Clay. The City also agreed to pay 
Mission Clay the lump sum of $5,000 to maintain in 
perpetuity Mission Clay's water well. In return, Mission 
Clay agreed, at a cost estimated by the Water Department 
to be $71,500, to demolish and dispose of the aqueduct 
structure on the subject easement which crosses Mission 
Clay property at no cost to the City. According to Josh 
Milstein, Deputy City Attorney, if this agreement had not 
been reached, the City would have demolished the 
aqueduct structure because the Sunol Aqueduct, 
including the portion on the subject easement, was no 
longer an economical method to provide water to Mission 
Clay. Therefore, under the Agreement, the City avoided 
an estimated cost of $71,500 associated with the 
demolishment of that portion of the Sunol Aqueduct on 
Mission Clay property. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

42 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



The Agreement also included a provision that once the 
replacement water supply well was installed, the 
aqueduct structure on the subject easement which 
interferes with Mission Clay's mining operations, could, 
as previously noted, be demolished, and the City would 
quitclaim the 1.47 acre portion of the subject easement 
without charge to Mission Clay in exchange for Mission 
Clay's demolition and disposal of the aqueduct structure 
on the subject easement. 

The proposed resolution would formally authorize the 
City to sell the subject 1.47 acre easement to Mission 
Clay, in accordance with the Agreement previously 
approved by the Board of Supervisors. 

1. As previously noted, the Water Department reports 
that the estimated cost of demolishing the aqueduct 
structure on the subject easement, which cost is to be 
borne solelv bv Mission Clay, is $71,500. 



Recommendation: 



2. The Real Estate Department has inspected and 
appraised the subject easement and determined that its 
fair market value is $26,450. Under the proposed 
resolution, the City would forego this value of $26,450 by 
transferring, through the execution of a quitclaim deed, 
the subject easement from the PUC to Mission Clay, 
without charge to Mission Clay. Therefore, the City 
would save an estimated $45,050 ($71,500 in costs to be 
borne by Mission Clay to demolish the aqueduct structure 
on the subject easement less $26,450, the value of the 
subject easement). According to Gary Dowd, of the Public 
Utilities Commission, the City's cost associated with the 
construction of the replacement water supply well on 
Mission Clay property should not be subtracted from the 
above savings to the City because the City was obligated, 
whether or not this agreement had been reached, to 
continue to provide water to Mission Clay. Mr. Dowd 
advises that construction of the water well would be the 
least expensive method for replacing water to Mission 
Clay. 

Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

43 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 8 - File 98-1033 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Comments: 



Public Utilities Commission 

Resolution authorizing the sale of 11,240 square feet of 
vacant land owned by the Public Utilities Commission 
(PUC), identified as a portion of Assessor Parcel No. 96- 
115-6-1 located in Sunol, Alameda County, to the State of 
California. 

The City, under the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities 
Commission, owns 11,240 square feet of land in the 
County of Alameda near Sunol along Highway 84 near 
the Alameda Creek Bridge, as shown in the Attachment 
to this report. Currently, this City-owned property is part 
of a larger 300 acre parcel of undeveloped watershed land. 
The State of California has requested that the City sell 
this 11,240 square feet parcel of land in order to realign 
and retrofit the Alameda Creek Bridge on Highway 84. 
The fair market value of the subject property purchase 
price, as determined by the Department of Real Estate, is 
$2,500, or approximately $0.22 per square foot. 

1. On May 26, 1998, the PUC approved a resolution 
(Resolution No. 98-0132) determining that the subject 
property is surplus to the PUC's needs. 

2. According to Mr. John Panieri of the Real Estate 
Department, the sale of the property was not opened to 
competitive bids at a public auction because the State has 
expressed its interest in acquiring the parcel of land for 
public purpose and could, if necessary, invoke eminent 
domain procedures against the City. However, according 
to Mr. Panieri, the purchase price of $2,500, or 
approximately $0.22 per square foot, to be paid by the 
State to the City, represents the fair market value of this 
property based on a comparison of similar properties in 
the area. 

3. If the proposed legislation is approved, Mr. Panieri 
states that the closing date on this property would be 
approximately September 1, 1998. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

4. The proposed resolution also states that the City shall 
indemnify and hold harmless the State of California from 
any and all claims regarding the title to the proposed 
property, provided that such indemnification does not 
exceed the $2,500 purchase price of the property. Mr. 
Panieri reports that although the City does not generally 
indemnify purchasers of property from the City, given 
that the State of California requested this indemnification 
provision and the relatively small amount of potential 
exposure for the City ($2,500), this provision was included 
in the proposed legislation. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 




46 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items 9 and 10 - Files 98-1067 and 98-1068 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Purchasing Department 

File 98-1067 : Resolution designating for outreach 
advertising, the Bay View Inc. to be the outreach 
newspaper of the City for the African-American 
community; designating the China Press to be the 
outreach newspaper of the City for the Chinese 
community; and designating the El Latino to be the 
outreach newspaper of the City for the Hispanic 
community. 

File 98-1068 : Resolution designating the San Francisco 
Bay Times for outreach advertising for the City for the 
Lesbian/ Gay/ Bisexual community until such time that a 
periodical can be designated as the official outreach 
periodical for the Lesbian/ Gay/ Bisexual Community. 

Proposition J, which was approved by the San Francisco 
electorate in November of 1994, provided, in part, for an 
Outreach Advertising Fund to be established for the 
purpose of the City placing "outreach advertising" or 
weekly notices of items pertaining to governmental 
operations in periodicals selected to reflect the diversity in 
race and sexual orientation of the population of the City. 
Outreach advertisements include, but are not limited to, 
information about issues that are being reviewed by the 
Board of Supervisors and directly affecting the public. 
Proposition J requires the City to withhold 10 percent of 
the amounts paid for official advertising and deposit the 
monies in the Outreach Advertising Revenue Fund. 

The Purchasing Department advises that pursuant to 
Proposition J, the Department issued an Invitation for 
Bids on May 9, 1998 for the City's outreach advertising. 
The issuance of the Invitation for Bids is in accordance 
with Section 2.80 of the Administrative Code, which finds 
that the City wishes to (1) maximize the public's access to 
public notices which are required to be published by law 
and (2) implement an aggressive outreach plan to meet 
the public information needs of those communities and 
neighborhoods which may not be adequately served by the 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

47 



Memo to Finance Committee 

-July L5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



City's other designated newspapers for official 
advertising. 

File 98-1067: The Purchasing Department received 

five bids in response to its Invitation for Bids including: 
(1) three bids for outreach advertising in the African 
American community, (2) one bid for outreach advertising 
in the Chinese community, and (3) one bid for outreach 
advertising in the Hispanic community. The Attachment 
provided by the Purchasing Department lists the bidders 
and the amounts bid. The "Cost of Sample" for the bid is 
the average cost to typeset a sample, calculated by 
dividing the total cost for the 4x6 inch block by the 
number of times the bidder is able to typeset the sample 
in the 4x6 inch block, using the bidder's choice of type font 
and column width. The cost of the 4x6 inch block is the 
number of lines in the block multiplied by the billing rate 
per line. 

The five bids were evaluated by the Purchasing 
Department on the basis of certain criteria and a point 
system established under Section 2.81-3 of the 
Administrative Code. Bidders were required to submit 
typeset samples and other documentation for evaluation 
purposes. The criteria used for evaluation of bids under 
Section 2.81-3 includes: (1) the advertising bid amount 
(the periodical which submits the lowest bid receives 
additional points), (2) the periodical's level of circulation 
(for each community, the periodical with the largest 
circulation receives additional points), (3) the cost of the 
periodical (any periodical with a majority of circulation 
that is free of charge to the general public receives 
additional points), (4) the ownership of the periodical (any 
periodical which is owned by a local, minority, or women- 
owned firm receives additional points), and (5) the foreign 
language content of the periodical (a periodical with a 
majority of its editorial content published in the native 
language of the outreach community it serves receives 
additional points). 

Based on the point system established in Section 2.81-3, 
the Purchasing Department is recommending that the 
Bay View Inc., the China Press, and the El Latino be 
awarded contracts for the City's outreach advertising, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

48 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

based on receiving the highest point totals. The 
Attachment provided by the Purchasing Department 
contains the point evaluation data of the bidders. 

File 98-1068: According to the Purchasing 

Department no bids were received for an official outreach 
newspaper for the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual community. 
Because no bids were received, the Purchasing 
Department is not making a recommendation regarding 
the award of the City's Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual outreach 
advertising for FY 1998-99. Instead, the proposed 
resolution extends the current designation of the San 
Francisco Bay Times for advertising until such time that 
an official outreach periodical is selected. 

Comments: 1. Pursuant to Proposition J and in accordance with 

Section 2.81-2(a), the City is required to withhold 10 
percent of the annual amounts paid for the Cit\''s Type 1 
and Type 2 official advertising and to deposit these 
monies into the Outreach Advertising Fund. Type 1 
official advertising is published on two or more 
consecutive days to advertise special meetings of the 
Board of Supervisors. Type 2 official advertising is 
published for a single day or non-consecutive days to 
advertise notices of committee meetings of the Board of 
Supervisors, Invitation for Bids, Request for Proposals, 
and citations. The Purchasing Department estimates 
that the FA" 1998-99 cost for the City's Type 1 and Type 2 
official advertising will be $837,100. Therefore, the 
estimated amount available for outreach advertising is 
$83,710, or 10 percent of the $837,100. 

2. The Purchasing Department states that the City 
Attorney has advised that the Board of Supervisors need 
not accept the Purchasing Department's 

recommendations to award contracts to the above-noted 
periodicals and may designate any periodical which is 
qualified under the Administrative Code. Additionally, 
pursuant to Sections 2.80-1 (b) and 2.81-4, the Board of 
Supervisors may specify additional outreach communities, 
and may authorize additional advertising for communities 
not adequately served by the City's official advertising 
and outreach periodicals. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

49 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

3. According to Mr. Edwin Lee, Director of Purchasing, 
there is a balance of approximately $175,100 in the 
Outreach Advertising Fund as of June 24, 1998. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolutions is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

50 



07/07- 9S TIT 14:39 FAI 1 413 534 6711 



CCSF PURCHASING DEPT 



ATTACHMENT 



@002 



Exhibit A 



FY 98-99 Bid Data and Point Calcula tion, hv Outreach Community 
AftiCM American 
Three bids were received. 



Cost of Sample 
Circulation, SF 
Circulation, Comm 
Price, if free 
Foreign language 
Locally owned 
Minority owned 
Woman owned 



Small Busi ness 
Avail. Exchjagfi 
Points Data Efi. 



15 

10' 

5 
5 
2 
2 
2 



Subtotal, Prop. J 41 

MBE/WBE/LBE Pref. 105 

Total 45.1 
Ranking 



S9.66 15.00 

1,50 .62 
1,500 

no 

no 

yes 2.00 

yes 2.00 

no 



10% 



San Francisco 
Bav View 
Data £j£ 



$14.08 

15.000 

15,000 

yes 

no 

yes 

yes 

no 



yes 



10.29 
6.17 

5.00 



2.00 

2.00 

Q- 

25.46 



Sun Reporter 


Publishing Co. 


P_aia 


£ts 


S46.50 


3.10 


24,325 


10.00 


24,325 




yes 


5.00 


no 





yes 


2.00 


yes 


2.00 


yes 


JLSQ. 



24.10 



2. Chinese 

One bid was received. 



Cost of Sample 
Circulation, SF 
Circulation, Comm 
Price, if zero 
Foreign language 
Locally owned 
Minority owned 
Woman owned 

Subtotal, Prop. J 

MBEAVBE/LBE Pref. 

Total 
Ranking 



Avail. 

Emms. 

15 
10 

5 
5 
2 
2 
2 

41 
10% 

45.1 



China Pr ess 


Data 


^is_ 


$12.16 
1,500 
1,500 
no 


15 
10 




yes 
yes 

yes 

no 


5 
2 
2 

JL 




34 


10% 


-1A 




37.4 

1 



Page 1 of 2 



07/07/98 TUE 14:39 FAl 1 415 554 6717 CCSF PURCHASING DEPT 



T C.avfl.esbiim/Bisexual 








No bids were received 








4. Hispanic 








One bid was received. 










Avail. 
Points 


El Latino 
Data 


.£&. 


Cost of Sample 
Circulation, SF 
Circulation, Coram 
Price, if zero 
Foreign language 
Locally owned 
Minority owned 
Woman owned 


15 
10 

5 
5 
2 

2 

2 


$12.10 

3.000 

3.000 

no 

yes 

yes 

yes 

yes 


15 
10 



5 
2 
2 

_2_ 



Subtotal, Prop. J 41 36 

MBE/WBE/LBE Pref. 10% 3.6 

Total 45.1 39.6 

Ranking 1 



Page 2 of 2 
52 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 11 -File 98-1073 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Department of Real Estate (DRE) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution confirming sale of surplus City-owned 
property. 

Pursuant to Ordinance No. 237-93 and Resolution No. 
362-98, authorizing the Director of Property to obtain bids 
at public auction for the sale of surplus property to the 
highest bidder, and in accordance with the published 
written notice inviting written tenders and oral bids at 
the June 23, 1998 public auction, the Director of Property 
received and recommends acceptance of the highest cash 
bids to purchase the following real properties under the 
jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works: 



Property 

Assessor's Block 3807, Lot 12 
7 th and Channel Streets 



Highest Bidder 
Macor, Inc. 



Bid Amount 
$3,768,000 



Assessor's Block 5067, Lot 3 

San Bruno Ave. near Campbell Ave. 



Samih M. Arikat and 
Samih I. Khoury 



99.000 



Total 



$3,867,000 

The subject property described as Assessor's Block 3807, 
Lot 12, near the intersection of 7 th and Channel Streets, is 
adjacent to the proposed Mission Bay development 
project. The property is vacant, roughly paved, level land 
zoned M2, an industrial classification. 

The subject property described as Assessor's Block 5067, 
Lot 3, on San Bruno Avenue near Campbell Avenue, is 
vacant, irregularly shaped and sloped land zoned RH1, a 
residential classification. 

Approval of this proposed resolution would confirm the 
sales and authorize the Director of Property to execute 
deeds to the highest bidders for the above City-owned 
property, subject to the terms and conditions contained in 
the Invitations to Bid. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



1. DRE estimates that the fair market value of Assessor's 
Block 3807, Lot 12, is $3,768,000 and Assessor's Block 
5067, Lot 3 is $99,000. DRE received one bid for each of 
the subject properties at the full fair market value of each 
property as estimated by DRE. The properties were 
marketed through signs placed on each property, 
approximately 2,000 flyers mailed to all members of the 
San Francisco Association of Realtors, all commercial 
brokerages, the Redevelopment Agency mailing list and to 
the DRE mailing list, and public notices were published in 
San Francisco Independent. In response to inquiries, 80 
packages of information were mailed. The DRE expenses 
related to such marketing activities total $33,622. DRE 
reports that the $33,622 in auction expenses would be 
deducted from the total proceeds of the sale and allocated 
to DRE to recover costs. 



Recommendation: 



2. The $3,833,378 balance ($3,867,000 less $33,622) of 
the net sale proceeds would be deposited in the DPW Real 
Property Fund. 

3. As described in the Attachment to this report, 
provided by Ms. Tina Olson of DPW, DPW is proposing to 
use an estimated $2,000,000 of the $3,833,378 for 
geographical consolidation of DPW staff, subject to 
supplemental appropriation approval by the Board of 
Supervisors: (1) the Bureau of Street Use and Mapping 
would be relocated from 875 Stevenson to 1680 Mission, 
(2) the Bureau of Engineering staff in 1680 Mission would 
be relocated to 30 Van Ness, and (3) DPW administrative 
staff moved to 30 Van Ness. According to Ms. Olson, such 
relocations would improve DPW customer service and 
operational efficiency. Ms. Olson reports that it is not yet 
known how the balance of $1,833,378 ($3,833,378 less 
$2,000,000) would be expended. 

Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

54 



City and County of San Francisco 




Department of Public Works 
Finance and Budget Division 

Attachment 



MEMORANDUM 

Date: July 9, 1998 

To: Taylor Emerson, BudgefAnalyst's Office 

From: Tina Olson, DPW / 7<^ UJ /i \ 

Subject: Use of Proceeds from Sale of Surplus City Land 

The Department of Public Works is evaluating whether to geographically 
consolidate some of its' Bureaus to improve customer support and operational 
efficiency. We are proposing to use approximately S2 million of the proceeds 
from the land sale to fund this consolidation. 

The Bureaus under the management of the City Engineer are presently housed 
in four locations, 30 Van Ness Avenue, 875 Stevenson Street, 1680 Mission and 
1660 Mission. DPW proposes to relocate all of its Bureau of Street- Use and 
Mapping staff to 1680 Mission Street, a city owned-building, to better serve the 
public because of its close proximity to other permitting agencies, namely City 
Planning and the Department of Building Inspection. The public would then be 
able to submit and obtain permits within a central location. 

The Bureau of Engineering is housed in two buildings; 1680 Mission Street and 
30 Van Ness Avenue. We are proposing to relocate Engineering staff from 1680 
Mission to 30 Van Ness. This would serve two purposes; first, to provide space 
for the Bureau of Street Use and Mapping and second, to improve operational 
efficiency within Engineering because staff would be at one location rather than 
two. 

DPW is also evaluating the relocation of its administrative staff from 875 
Stevenson Street to 30 Van Ness to be closer to the Bureaus that they support. 

We estimate that these relocations would cost S2 million, which includes moving 
and reinstalling furniture and computer equipment, building partitions and 
finishes, and renovating 1680 Mission Street to provide customer counter 
support, facade and interior improvements. If we decide to proceed with these 
relocations, we will submit a supplemental appropriation to the Mayor and Board 
of Supervisors sometime in the next six months. 



(415) 554-^829 



Fax (415)554-7600 



875 Stevenson Street, Room 455 



San Francisco 94103 



55 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 12 - File 98-1885 

Note: The Budget Analyst has been informed by the Department of 

Administrative Services that an Amendment of the Whole of this 
proposed ordinance will be submitted to delete references to purchases 
under Federal Contracts. This report describes the proposed ordinance 
as it will be amended. 



Department: 
Item: 



Department of Administrative Services 

Ordinance amending the Administrative Code to 
authorize the Purchaser to purchase goods and services, 
including materials, equipment, supplies and contractual 
services under contracts executed by the State of 
California. 



Description: 



Chapter 21 of the Administrative Code establishes 
purchasing procedures that must be followed by City 
Departments. Under Administrative Code Section 21.46, 
the Purchaser may utilize the State Department of 
General Services to make purchases of materials, 
equipment or supplies. Such acquisitions can be made in 
cases where the Purchaser deems that it is in the best 
interests of the City and County to do so, and with the 
prior approval of the Director of Administrative Services. 

Further, Administrative Code Section 21.6 requires 
competitive bidding or proposals for any procurement of 
materials, supplies, equipment or contractual services 
when the Purchaser estimates that the cost of the 
purchase will exceed $50,000. 

The State Department of General Services is responsible 
for procurement of goods and services for State agencies, 
and makes their procurement contracts available to local 
governments, such as cities, counties and school districts. 
Many local jurisdictions find that because of the discounts 
leveraged through the mass purchasing power of the 
State, savings are realized through utilization of the State 
Department of General Services contracts. 

The proposed ordinance would amend Administrative 
Code Section 21.46 to permit the Purchaser to make 
purchases from any State of California Department 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

56 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



contract, instead of limiting the Purchaser to just 
contracts executed by the State Department of General 
Services. The proposed ordinance would add contractual 
services to the items that could by purchased through the 
State, in addition to materials, equipment and supplies. 

Such purchases would not be subject to any maximum 
amount, as long as the price paid by the City is at or 
below the price provided in the State contract. Therefore, 
Administrative Code Section 21.6, requiring competitive 
bidding for purchases that are estimated to cost more 
than $50,000 would not apply to purchases made under 
State contracts if the proposed ordinance is approved. 



Comment: 1. According to Mr. Steve Nelson, Director of 

Administrative Services, the proposed ordinance would 
expand the Purchaser's authority to benefit from the bulk 
purchasing practices of State Agencies. The City will 
benefit from the State contracts without incurring the 
cost of developing bid specifications and would enable the 
Purchaser to dedicate resources to efficient purchasing of 
items unique to the City's needs. 

2. In addition, according to Mr. Nelson, the proposed 
ordinance would establish a price ceiling by stating that 
the Purchaser could only make purchases at or below the 
prices provided in the State contract. Under this 
legislation, the Purchaser would also be permitted to 
negotiate lower prices than the prices provided under the 
State contract without the use of competitive bidding. 

3. In the professional judgement of the Budget Analyst, it 
is conceiveable that the City could obtain prices lower 
than that the prices obtained through State contracts, by 
conducting a separate competitive bidding process. In that 
connection, Mr. Nelson states that he would continue to 
be required to approve all purchases made under this 
provision of the Administrative Code, and that the 
Purchaser would continue to review previous competitive 
bids conducted by the City and compare the results with 
the prices realized under State contracts. If it is indicated 
that the City can achieve lower prices through its own 
competitive bidding process prior to making purchases 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

57 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 15, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



under a State contract, then such an independent 
competitive bidding process would be conducted by the 
City. 



Recommendation: 



Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 




Harvey M. Rose 



Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 



Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

58 



0-2^ 



**ln 



MINUTES n o--iMCMTSDEPT. 

t FINANCE COMMITTEE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS <. , ., --q^vCISGO 

CITY AND COUNTY OF ^SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REGULAR MEETING 



WEDNESDAY. JULY 22. 1998 - 1:00 P.M. VETERANS BUILDING 

401 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

ABSENT: Supervisor Newsom for entire meeting. 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

Meeting Commenced: 1: 08 p.m. 

CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All items listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are 

considered to be routine by the Committee and will be acted upon 
by a single, roll-call vote of the Committee. There will be no 
separate discussion of these items unless a member of the 
Committee or the public so reguests, in which event the matter 
shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a 
separate item. 

a. File 98-1147 . [Reserved Funds, Port] Hearing to consider 
release of reserved funds, Port Commission (Ord. No. 
252-97), in the amount of $565,870.80 to fund construction 
contract for three pre-engineered parking shelters and a 
wash area containment facility at Pier 50, Shed D. (Port 
Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $565,870.80 approved. Filed. 

b. F ile 98-1149 . [Reserved Funds, MOCD] Hearing to consider 
release of reserved funds, Mayor's Office of Community 
Development (Resolution Nos. 1076-96 and 122-98) in the 
total amount of $231,474, to fund two projects (Workforce 
Development Pool/Mission Hiring Hall - $28,000; Chinatown 
Economic Development Pool - $203,474.) (Mayor's Office of 
Community Development) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $231,474 approved. Filed. 



File 98-1150 . [Prop J Contract, Laundry Services] 
Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that Laundry Services can be performed for the Department 
of Public Health, San Francisco General Hospital by private 
contractor for a lower cost than similar work performed by 
City and County employees. (Dept. of Public Health) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 



REGULAR CALENDAR 



File 98-1120 . [Settlement of Grievance] Ordinance authorizing 
settlement of the pay grievance of Mark Dorian filed pursuant to 
Memorandum of Understanding between the International Federation 
of Professional and Electrical Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, and 
the City and County of San Francisco in the amount of Eighteen 
Thousand Dollars ($18,000.00). (Department of Human Resources) 

SPEAKERS: None. 



ACTION: 



Consideration continued to 8/5/98 



File 98-1141 . [IHSS Contract Extension - Addus Healthcare] 
Resolution approving the contract between the City and County of 
San Francisco and Addus Healthcare for the provision of In-Home 
Supportive Services for the period from July 1, 1998 to July 31, 
1998 in the amount of $687,000; see File 98-0934. (Supervisor 
Teng) 

SPEAKER: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on lines 4 and 15 between 

"July 1, 1998" and "to" to insert ", retroactively,". 
(See new title). Recommended as amended. 

New Title : [IHSS Contract Approval - Addus Healthcare] 
Resolution approving the contract between the City and 
County of San Francisco and Addus Healthcare for the 
provision of In-Home Supportive Services for the 
period from July 1, 1998, retroactively, to July 31, 
1998 in the amount of $687,000; see File 98-0934. 
(Dept. of Human Services) 



NOTE: Supervisor Tenet replaced Dept. of Human 
Services as sponsor. 



File 98-1083 . [Agreement, Parking Citation Processing] 
Resolution authorizing the Executive Director of the Department 
of Parking and Traffic to execute an agreement between the City 
and County of San Francisco and PRWT Services, Inc. for an 
automated parking citation processing and collections system, 
including handheld ticket writing devices; companion measure to 
File 98-1111. (Supervisors Teng, Kaufman) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Stuart Sunshine, 

Director, Dept. of Parking and Traffic - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

NOTE: Supervisors Teng and Kaufman replaced Dept. 
of Parking and Traffic as sponsor. 

File 98-1111 . [Prop J Contract, Parking Citation Processing] 
Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification that 
the proposed contract with PRWT Services, Inc. for an automated 
parking citation processing and collections system can 
practically be performed by a private contractor for a lower 
cost than similar services performed by City and County 
employees; companion measure to File 98-1083. (Supervisors 
Teng, Kaufman) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Stuart Sunshine, 

Director, Dept. of Parking and Traffic - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

NOTE: Supervisors Teng and Kaufman replaced Dept. 
of Parking and Traffic as sponsor. 

File 98-1151 . [Combined Negotiated Net Amount/Medical 
Agreement] Resolution authorizing the Dept. of Public Health, 
Community Substance Abuse Services, to enter into a Combined 
Negotiated Net Amount and Drug Medi-Cal Agreement for the term 
July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999 with the State of California, 
Dept. of Alcohol and Drug Programs in the amount of $15,986,354 
as a condition of receiving state funds for substance abuse 
treatment; holding the State Department of Alcohol and Drug 
Programs harmless from any and all claims resulting from the 
agreement; authorizing and designating the Director of Community 
Substance Abuse Services to sign said agreement and to approve 
contract amendments for less than ten percent (10%) of the 
contracted amount. (Dept. of Public Health) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Anne Okubo, Dept. of 
Public Health - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on page 1, line 2 after "1998" 
to insert ", retroactively,"; amended on page 1, line 
25 after "1998" and before "through" to insert ", 
retroactively,". (See new title). Recommended as 
amended. 



New Title: [Combined Negotiated Net Amount/Medical 
Agreement] Resolution authorizing the Dept. of Public 
Health, Community Substance Abuse Services, to enter 
into a Combined Negotiated Net Amount and Drug 
Medi-Cal Agreement for the term July 1, 1998, 
retroactively, through June 30, 1999 with the State of 
California, Dept. of Alcohol and Drug Programs in the 
amount of $15,986,354 as a condition of receiving 
state funds for substance abuse treatment; holding the 
State Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs harmless 
from any and all claims resulting from the agreement; 
authorizing and designating the Director of Community 
Substance Abuse Services to sign said agreement and to 
approve contract amendments for less than ten percent 
(10%) of the contracted amount. (Dept. of Public 
Health) 

File 98-1140 . [Permit to Use City Property] Resolution 
authorizing the City Administrator to enter into an agreement 
with the Hastings College of the Law which will permit the 
College to use the San Francisco Superior and Municipal Courts 
Building at 400 McAllister, specifically three (3) jury rooms 
and one (1) multi-purpose room (total four (4) rooms), two hours 
daily at the rate of $35.00 per day beginning August 24, 1998 
and ending December 3, 1998. (Real Estate Dept.) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Harry Quinn, Real Estate 
Dept. - support. 

ACTION: Hearinq held. Recommended. 



File 98-1178 . [Recision of Tax Deed for Public Auction Sale] 
Resolution authorizing the Tax Collector to cancel the tax deed 
issued to the purchaser of 43 Crescent Avenue (Parcel No. 
34-5746-012) following the September 2, 1997 public auction of 
tax defaulted property and to refund the bid amount to the 
purchaser. (Treasurer/Tax Collector) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; George Putris, Deputy 

City Atty. ; Susal Leal, Treasurer - support; Richard 
Sullivan, Tax Collector - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on line 3 between "of" and 
"Crescent" to replace "43" with "45". (See new 
title). Recommended as amended. 

New Title: [Recision of Tax Deed for Public Auction 
Sale] Resolution authorizing the Tax Collector to 
cancel the tax deed issued to the purchaser of 
45 Crescent Avenue (Parcel No. 34-5746-012) following 
the September 2, 1997 public auction of tax defaulted 
property and to refund the bid amount to the 
purchaser. (Treasurer/Tax Collector) 



9. File 98-1058 . [Visitacion Valley] Hearing to consider an update 
on the quality of life in Visitacion Valley specifically 
concerning community policing, economic development, child care, 
open space, and street cleaning. (Supervisor Teng) 

SPEAKERS: Commander Santos, SFPD; Lt. Speros, SFPD; Marcia 

Rosen, Mayor's Office of Housing; Pam David, Mayor's 
Office of Community Development; Joe Lam, Mayor's 
Office of Children, Youth & Families; David Ishida, 
Commission on Aging; Hala Hijazi, Mayor's Office of 
Economic Development; Marcia DeVaughn, Dept. of Public 
Works; Melvin Baker, Dept. of Public Works; Marlene 
Tran, Visitacion Valley Asian Alliance. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to the Call of 
the Chair. 



VOTE ON ALL ITEMS WAS 2-0. 
Meeting Adjourned: 2 : 55 p.m. 



f 
7 



Public Library,Gov't Info. Ctr., 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



July 17, 1998 
TO: 

FROM: 

SUBJECT: July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 
Item la -File 98-1147 



Finance Committee 

Budget Analyst ^ DCKWM&fTS DEPT. 

JUL 2 1 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 






Department: 
Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Port of San Francisco 

Hearing to request release of reserved funds in the 
amount of $565,870.80 for construction work at the Port's 
Pier SOD Maintenance Facility for parking shelters and 
wash area containment. 

$565,870.80 

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce Loan Proceeds 

In March, 1996, San Francisco voters approved 
Proposition B, which established a special zoning district 
to permit the construction of a new baseball stadium on 
Port property on Pier 46 at China Basin. In order for the 
baseball stadium to be built, the Port of San Francisco 
must relocate its existing maintenance facilities from Pier 
46B to Pier SOD. 

In June, 1997 the Board of Supervisors adopted a 
resolution approving and authorizing the Port 
Commission to enter into a loan agreement with the 
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce as lender, in an 
amount of up to $12,000,000, in order to finance projects 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

related to the new ballpark construction (File 178-97-3). 
At that time, the Board of Supervisors also approved a 
supplemental appropriation ordinance in the amount of 
$7,550,000 in proceeds from this $12,000,000 loan, for a 
capital improvement project to relocate the Port's 
Maintenance Facility from its current site at Pier 46B to 
Pier 50D (File 101-96-83). Of this $7,550,000, $6,052,714 
was placed on reserve pending the selection of contractors 
and the submission of final contract details. Of the total 
funds reserved, $3,259,427 was earmarked for contractual 
services to renovate Pier SOD for use as the Port's 
maintenance facility (see Comment No. 3). 

On June 23, 1998, through a competitive bid process, the 
Port Commission awarded a contract in the amount of 
$514,428 to the lowest bidder, Kin Wo Construction, to 
supply and construct three pre-engineered parking 
shelters and a wash area containment facility, including 
required utility installations, grading, drainage and 
paving work at Pier 50, Shed D. The pre-engineered 
parking shelter is a prefabricated structure in which the 
Port's maintenance vehicles will be parked. The wash 
area containment facility, in which Port maintenance 
vehicles will be washed, will prevent run-off from entering 
the Bay. 

The Port Commission is now requesting the release of 
$565,870.80, consisting of $514,428 for the construction 
contract plus a 10 percent contingency in the amount of 
$51,442.80. 

Budget: The Attachment contains a breakdown of the $514,428 for 

the construction costs related to the contract with Kin Wo 
Construction. 

Comments: 1. Km Wo Construction submitted the lowest of three 

bids for this project. The Attachment also displays the 
two other firms that submitted bids and their bid 
amounts. 

2. Ms. Veronica Sanchez of the Port advises that 
construction work is scheduled to begin in mid-August, 
1998 and will be completed by approximately mid- 
December, 1998. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Julv 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



3. Under a lease agreement between the Port and the 
Giants approved by the Board of Supervisors in July of 
1997 (File 262-97-3). the Port will be reimbursed for the 
costs of relocating its maintenance facility to Pier 50D 
through annual rent payments from the Giants for the 
ballpark site. 

Recommendation: Approve the requested release of reserved funds in the 

amount of $565,870.80. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Attachment 



5 I 



? 3 'C 

2 3 



U 5 = 



£3 


g 


O 




--; 


o 


O 




O 


o 


C3 




IJ 


o 

o 


in 






o 


cm 




-j 


Lfl 


•» 






*» 







Ol OIOI 



< < 






OiO I 

c;; c 
olo • 
CMirsi < 

w"Jr> 



I':- -2 3 






.- 


c 


o 


_ 


a 


o 




S3 


-. 




_-. 


«• 


•- 


> 


U 


CJ 


c 


o 






ffilfl 

— — — : — ~ ~ --^ ~ *~ 






Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item lb - File 98-1149 



Department: 



Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Mayor's Office of Community Development (MOCD) 

Hearing to consider the release of $231,474 in reserved 
Community Development Block Grant funds for: (a) 
Department of Human Services/Mission Hiring Hall 
($28,000); and (b) Chinatown Community Development 
Center and Chinatown Facade Improvement Program 
($203,474). 



$231,474 

Previously reserved 1997 and 1998 
Development Block Grant (CD) funds. 



Community 



Under the 1998 Community Development Block Grant 
(CD) Program, the Board of Supervisors reserved a total 
of $1,909,331 for the Workforce Development Pool 
pending the provision of programmatic and budgetary 
details. In April 1998, the Board of Supervisors released 
$1,000,000 for improvements to the Department of 
Human Services leased facility at 1235 Mission Street for 
the Personal Assisted Employment Services (File 98-578) 
leaving $909,331 on reserve. The MOCD is now 
recommending the release of $28,000 from the remaining 
$909,331, leaving a balance of $881,331 remaining on 
reserve. The MOCD recommends the release of $28,000 
for the Department of Human Services/Mission Hiring 
Hall project. 

Under the 1997 CD program, the Board of Supervisors 
reserved a total of $211,300 for the Chinatown Economic 
Development Pool pending submission of budget details 
on the specific economic development projects to be 
funded. In the approved 1998 CD Program budget, the 
Board of Supervisors placed an additional $100,000 on 
reserve, increasing the amount of reserved monies for the 
Chinatown Economic Development Pool from $211,300 to 
$311,300. The MOCD is now recommending the release of 
$203,474 for the Chinatown Community Development 
Center and the Chinatown Facade Improvement 
Program, leaving a balance of $107,826 remaining on 
reserve for the Chinatown Economic Development Pool. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
5 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Project descriptions and related budget details are as 

follows: 

Department of Human Services/Mission Hiring 
Hall; Yerba Buena Work Program, 288 7 th Street 
(S2.S.000) 

Attachment I provided by MOCD, details a proposed 
budget for this project. The proposed funding would allow 
the Department of Human Services, through its contract 
with the Private Industry Council, which in turn has a, 
ongoing sub-contract with the Mission Hiring Hall, a non- 
profit agency, to develop a new program called Yerba 
Buena Work. This Program would be located within the 
existing South of Market Employment Center facility (at 
288 7 th Street), currently leased to Mission Hiring Hall. 
The MOCD advises that this new Program would provide 
over 200 welfare recipients and South of Market residents 
with work-readiness, job placement and job retention 
services. The new Program is a collaboration with 
employers in the nearby Yerba Buena Center which has 
made a commitment to recruit and hire persons who have 
entered into the Mission Hiring Hall Program. As shown 
in the budget details under Attachment I, the release of 
$28,000 of reserved funds from the Workforce 
Development Pool would be used to renovate the Market 
Employment Center facility to create a new workshop and 
training space for the Yerba Buena Work Program. 

Chinatown Community Development Center and 
Chinatown Facade Improvement Program 
($203,474) 

Attachment II provided by the MOCD is a proposed 
budget for this Program. The proposed Program would 
provide 13 matching grants (5 facade grants and 8 neon 
restoration grants) to businesses to improve historic 
facades, storefronts, neon signs and storefront lighting 
(see Comment 2). The funding would be administered by a 
non-profit organization, the Chinatown Community 
Development Center (CCDC) which would oversee the 
design, technical assistance and renovation process. These 
funds would also pay for a portion of staff salaries at the 
CCDC and related expenses for administering the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
6 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Program, as shown in the budget details under 
Attachment II. The Program is designed to improve the 
appearance of ground floor facades, signs and awnings in 
Chinatown. The MO CD advises that the Program would 
support the Enterprise Community priorities for 
Chinatown. According to Mr. Jon Pon of the MOCD, these 
Enterprise Community priorities were established by 
Chinatown's Neighborhood Planning Body, a body set up 
by MOCD that focuses on setting specific priorities for its 
neighborhood that are consistent with the principle of 
increasing economic opportunity in low economic areas. 
These priorities have been approved as part of HUD's 
designation for Neighborhood Revitalization Strategies. 

Comments: 1. Mr. Pon advises that the positions detailed in the 

proposed budget for the Chinatown Community 
Development Center (CCDC) and the Chinatown Facade 
Improvement Program are existing positions within the 
CCDC. The requested funds would pay for between 30 
and 50 percent of these positions as follows: 









Annual 




Time 


allocated 


Salary for 


Title 


to this Program 


this Proeram 


Project Coordinator 




50% 


$23,010 


Planner 




50 


17,700 


Community Organizer 




40 


16.520 


Clerical Assistant 




30 


9.204 


Total 






S66.434 



2. Mr. Pon advises that the CCDC has not yet specifically 
identified which businesses will receive the grant funds 
from the Chinatown Economic Development Pool. The 
budget shown in Attachment II details the maximum 
amounts which will be distributed by CCDC for 5 facade 
improvements ($50,000) and 8 neon restoration projects 
($57,500). Attachment III provided by Mr. Pon explains 
how the MOCD determined the specific amounts of the 
following grants: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Facade Improvement Grants Neon Restoration Grants 

Total S Total S 

Two® $7,500 515,000 Three @ $5,000 $15,000 

Two® 10,000 20,000 Three® 7,500 22,500 

One® 15,000 15.000 Two® 10,000 20.000 

Total $50,000 Total $57,500 

The Community Organizer and Planner involved in this 
project will conduct community outreach to publicize the 
program and attract grant applications from businesses. 
CCDC will then finalize criteria for determining which 
businesses will receive the grant funds and in what 
amount. CCDC will also employ an Architectural 
Consultant to design the facade and neon restoration 
improvements. 

Recommendations: 1. Approve the release of $28,000 for the Department of 

Human Services/Mission Hiring Hall; Verba Buena Work 
Program as requested. 

2. Approve the release of $95,974 of the requested 
$203,474 for the Chinatown Community Development 
Center and Chinatown Facade Improvement Program. 

3. Approval of the remaining S 107,500 (S203.474 less 
$95,974) including $50,000 for facade improvements and 
$57,500 for neon restoration projects, when the recipients 
of the grants have not yet been identified, is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



ATTACHMENT I Supervisor Teng 

July 3, 199S 



Department of Human Services/Mission Hiring H; 
Yerba Buena Works 
288 7 !h Street 

1998 CDBG Procram 
Project Budcet 



Proposed Improvements Cost estimates 

Second Floor; 

Rough framing 3 

Drywall and taping 

Finish carpentry 

Doors and hardware 

Windows/glazing 

Painting 

Electrical outlets/lighting 

Roof mounted HVAC 

Supports for A/V equipment 

TOTAL S 28,000 




/ 



ATTACHMENT II Supervisor Teng 

July 3, 1993 



Chinatown Community Development Center 

1997 and 1998 CDBG Programs 
Proiect Budaet 



Chinatown Facade Improvement Program 

Salaries S66.434 

50% Project Coordinator S23, 010 
50% Planner 317,700 
40% Community organizer S16.520 
30% Administrative staff SS.204 

5 Facade Grants S50.000 

8 Neon Restoration Grants S57.500 

Architectural consultant S1 5,000 

Computer Graphic Services S 1,150 

Insurance S 2,000 

Supplies and Phone S 4,040 

Fiscal Audit, and Accounting S 7.350 

TOTAL S2C 



10 



: 3SP 

?o ii-i/i-m LCUC (A15) 362 7932 

ATTACHMENT III 



Chinatown Community 
Development Center 



FAX MEMORANDUM 

TO: Mr. Jon Pon, Mayor's Office of Community Development 

FR: Jasmine Kaw 

RE: Chinatown Facade Improvement Program 

I am responding to your phone message regarding the justification for the proposed 
budgets for the facade and neon projects thai have not yet been thus far identified. 

In structuring the proposed budget, I had preliminary conversations with tw© individuals 
referred to me by various trades people to be "experts" in the fields of architecture and 
neon restoration. The architect who recommended the proposed estimates for the facade 
budget toured Chinatown with me on a day-long tour to review typical facade types and 
concluded that within certain budgets, certain types of improvements were feasible. 
Similarly, I met with a neon restoration specialist based in San Francisco at his studio and 
estimated the neon budget relative to typical work done in various neighborhoods in the 
CiTy. 

If you would like to contact either the architect or the neon restoration specialist directly, 
please feel free to use the following references: Mui Ho, Architect - 5 10 644 2600; and 
Jim Ri2zo of Neon Works - 415 282 2700. 




Post-It- bran d tax transmittal mero ojeT^j^g!!! 




1525 Grant Avenue • San Francisco, California 94133-3323 
415.984.1450 ■ ?*x 415-3627992 • CRS 800 735.2929 



&nmrrtv Cjti rtAtOWn RtsaurXt C* 



try Homing Corpwuo 



11 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lc - File 98-1150 



Department: 



Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 



Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH), San Francisco 
General Hospital (SFGH) 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's Certification 
that the laundry services can continue to be performed for 
the Department of Public Health, San Francisco General 
Hospital by a private contractor for a lower cost than 
similar work performed by City and County employees. 



Laundry Processing Service at San Francisco General 
Hospital 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by City employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for 
laundry processing services at San Francisco General 
Hospital for FY 1998-99 (the first year of the proposed two 
year contract beginning July 1, 1998 through June 30. 
2000) would result in the estimated savings as follows: 



Citv Operated Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 
Operating Expenses 
Capital Costs* 
Total 



Lowest Highest 

Salary Salary 

Step Step 



$447,5 73 

133,172 

92,400 

169.537 



S519.693 

144,509 

92,400 

169.537 



SS42,682 S926.139 



Contractual Services Cost 704.562 704.562 

Estimated Savings 5138,120 $221,577 

* Amortized over seven years @ 7%. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



1. Laundry services for San Francisco General Hospital 
were first certified as required under Proposition J 
(Charter Section 10.104) in 1994 and since then, thr-y 
have been continuously provided by outside contractors. 

2. The proposed resolution should be amended to 
retroactively approve the Controller's Certification as of 
July 1, 1998. 

3. The current one year contract expires on June 30, 1998, 
and is with Tartan Textile Services, Inc. The DPH has 
selected Tartan, based on a competitive bid process, to 
continue the provision of these services. 

4. The laundry processing service costs for FY 1998-99 is 
$0.27 per pound, the same as in FY 1997-98. DPH 
estimates the total annual weight of the laundry is 
2,555,000 pounds, or 55,000 more than the 2,500,000 
pounds of laundry processed in FY 1997-98. Based on the 
pounds of laundry and related contract monitoring costs, 
the Contractual Services Cost used for the purposes of 
this analysis is Tartan's estimated cost for laundry 
services for FY" 1998-99. 

5. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is shown in the Attachment to 
this report. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



ATTACHMENT 
CHARTER 8.300-1 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE: 



Department: Department of Public Health, San Francisco General Hospital 

Contract Services: Laundry Services 

For term starting approximately: July 1, 1998 through June 30, 2000. 

Who performed services prior to contracting out? Civil Service employees. The level of staffing at 

SFGH was reduced to 12 employees as a result of contracting out in July 1994. Since one (1) 2780 

Laundry Supervisor has resigned from his position at SFGH the number was reduced to 1 1 employees as 

the new level of staffing at SFGH. Originally, the laundry services were performed by 34 Civil Service 

employees: 1 FTE 2786 General Services Manager; 2 FTE 2780 Laundry Supervisors; 1 FTE 2772 Sewing 

Technician; 1 1 FTE 2770 Sr. Laundry Workers; and, 19 FTE Laundry Workers. (However, one 2760 

Laundry Worker retired and was never replaced and one 2780 Laundry Supervisor resigned from his 

position at SFGH). 

The revised level of staffing to be used reflects efficiencies in the laundry operations if new equipment is 

installed (the old equipment was sold and removed from the premises) and comprises 21 employees. These 

are: 1 FTE 2786 General Services Manager; 1 FTE 1426 Sr. Clerk Typist; 1 FTE 2772 Sewing Technician; 

7 FTE 2770 Sr. Laundry Workers; and, 11 FTE 2760 Laundry Workers. 

Number of City employees laid off as a result of contracting out? A total of 19 laundry workers were 

laid off from laundry worker positions and placed in #99 1 positions within the Department of Public 

Health (2-2770 Sr. Laundry Workers and 17-2760 Laundry Workers). However, no one was separated 

from City &. Country service. 

Explain disposition of employee if they were not laid off. The following 11 classifications remained at 

SFGH to manage the linen distribution system: 1 FTE 2786 General Service Manager; 1 FTE 2772 

Sewing Technician; 6 FTE 2770 Sr. Laundry Workers; and, 3 FTE 2760 Laundry Workers. These work 

assignments were not affected by the proposed Prop J contract. Tne other 23 employees were either 

reassigned to Laguna Honda Hospital, placed in 9910 positions within the DPH, resigned, retired or took a 

voluntary leave to accept another position. 

19 employees were assigned to duties in 9910 positions as follows: #2760: 1 assigned to SFGH 

Housekeeping as Porter, 1 assigned to Asst. Storekeeper duties in SFGH Pharmacy, 1 assigned to clerical 

duties in the Mental Health Rehab Facility, 1 assigned to Buildings & Grounds as a Porter, 1 assigned to 

Human Resources as a personnel clerk (resigned effective COB 7/8/94 to accept a position in the US Postal 

Services, 4 assigned to train as security guards in Institutional Police Department, 1 assigned to AIDS 

office, 4 assigned to LHH laundry, and 1 assigned to LHH Housekeeping. Of the 2770 classification: 1 

assigned to SFGH Messengers and 1 assigned to LHH Laundry. 

In addition, 3 employees voluntarily took a leave to accept 9910 positions: 1-2770 Sr. Laundry Worker and 

1-2760 Laundry Worker are being trained in SFGH Security; 1-2760 Laundry Worker is being trained in 

SFGH Radiology Department performing clerical duties. 

What percent of a City employee's time is spent on services to be contract out? 

Approximately 2% or less of an Assistant Hospital Administrator's (classification 2143) time would be 

spent on administering this contract. 

How long have the services been contracted out? 4 years (since July 1, 1994). 

How will contract services meet the goals of your MBEAVBE Action Plan? Contractor will be selected 

through a competetive bid process. All interested MBE/WBE'LBE will be notified and will be encouraged 

to bid. 



H. Dwight Starr, Director 
DPH Materials Management 
Department Representative 



206-5088 
Telephone 



14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 2 - File 98-1120 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Comment: 



Department of Human Resources (DHR) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Ordinance authorizing the settlement of a pay grievance 
of Mr. Mark Dorian, filed against the City pursuant to the 
Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, in the amount of $18,000. 

The proposed ordinance would approve a settlement 
against the City in the amount of 818,000 for a grievance 
filed on behalf of Mr. Mark Dorian by the International 
Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 
21. AFL-CIO. 

The Department of Public Works and the Department of 
Human Resources have requested that this item be 
continued for one week to the Finance Committee meeting 
of July 29, 1998. 



Recommendation: 



Continue the proposed ordinance to July 29, 1998, as 
requested by the Departments. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 3 -File 98-1141 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 



Description: 



Department of Human Services (DHS) 

Resolution approving a contract between the City and 
County of San Francisco and Addus HealthCare for the 
provision of In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) for the 
period from July 1, 1998 to July 31, 1998, in the amount of 

$687,000. 

$687,000 

General Fund monies included in DHS's FY 

1998-99 budget $206,100 

Federal and State Medicaid Funds included in 

DHS's FY 1998-99 budget 480.900 

Total $687,000 

In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) is an entitlement 
program which provides funding for low-income seniors and 
disabled people to receive non-medical personal care and 
other household assistance in their homes from visiting 
workers. IHSS care can allow seniors and disabled persons 
to remain in their own homes and thereby avoid unnecessary 
and expensive hospitalization or institutionalization. IHSS 
workers function (a) as independent providers; (b) through a 
contract between DHS and the IHSS Consortium, which 
consists of non-profit providers of services; or (c) through a 
contract between DHS and Addus HealthCare, a private 
provider of services. 

In 1994, the Board of Supervisors approved two contracts for 
IHSS services, one with the IHSS Consortium and one with 
Addus HealthCare, for the period from October 1, 1994 
through June 30, 1997, with an option to renew for one year. 
These contracts both expired on June 30, 1998. Although 
DHS had negotiated new contracts with both of these entities 
for the period from July 1, 1998 through June 30, 2001, 
because of a delay in the State's approval of a new IHSS 
contract rate, DHS was unable to implement these contracts 
on July 1, 1998. As of the writing of this report there is 
currently legislation pending before the Board of Supervisors 
to approve two new contracts with the IHSS Consortium and 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Addus HealthCare for the period from August 1, 1998 
through June 30, 2001 (Files 98-934 and 98-935). 

In order to prevent a disruption in service between June 30, 
1998, when the existing contracts expired, and August 1, 
1998, when the two new contracts commence, the proposed 
resolution would authorize a one-month extension of the 
existing contract with Addus HealthCare for the period from 
July 1, 1998 through July 31, 1998. The Human Services 
Commission approved the proposed one-month contract 
extension with Addus HealthCare on June 25, 1998. 

Under the proposed contract extension, Addus HealthCare 
would operate under the same terms and conditions as 
provided for in the existing contract. Addus HealthCare 
would provide 50,000 hours of service at an hourly rate of 
$13.74 per hour, for a total cost of $687,000, from July 1, 
1998 through July 31, 1998. The hourly rates include wages 
paid to IHSS workers, benefits, training, travel, insurance 
and administrative costs. The total amount of the existing 
Addus HealthCare contract from October 1, 1994 through 
July 31, 1998 would therefore increase from $29,213,000 to 
$29,900,000. 

A one-month extension of the existing contract with the IHSS 
Consortium, from July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1998, has 
also been approved by the Human Services Commission. 
However, according to Mr. Anthony Nicco of DHS, the one- 
month extension of the existing IHSS Consortium contract 
does not require Board of Supervisors approval because, 
unlike the Addus HealthCare contract, the total amount of 
the IHSS Consortium contract (including the one-month 
extension) is less than the $10 million threshold requiring 
Board of Supervisors approval. 

Comment: Since the contract extension was scheduled to commence on 

July 1, 1998, the proposed resolution should be amended to 
provide for retroactive approval to July 1, 1998. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to provide for retroactive 
approval to July 1, 1998. 

2. Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items 4 and 5 - Files 98-1083 and 98-1111 



Department: 
Item: 



Contract Amount: 



Source of Funds: 



Term of Contract: 



Description: 



Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) 

File 98-1083: Resolution authorizing the Executive 

Director of the Department of Parking and Traffic to 
execute a four year contract between the City and County 
of San Francisco and PRWT Sendees Inc. for an 
automated parking citation processing and collections 
system, including handheld ticket writing devices. 

File 98-1111: Resolution concurring with the 

Controller's certification that the proposed contract with 
PRWT Services Inc. for an automated parking citation 
processing and collections system can practically be 
performed by a private contractor for a lower cost than 
similar services performed by City and County employees. 

The contract cost is based on a fee per parking citation 
processed. DPT assumes 2,274,000 citations will be 
processed in the first contract year at a total cost of 
$5,368,060. The estimated value of the four year contract 
is $20,903,740. 

The source of funds for the contract is the revenue 
collected from parking citations. 

Four years, with an option to renew up to four additional 
years. 

On November 1, 1993, the Department of Parking and 
Traffic (DPT) assumed responsibility for processing and 
collecting parking citation fines from the Trial Courts, 
following a State law that decriminalized parking 
violations. In FY 1997-98, the City budgeted parking fine 
revenue of $49,800,000, of which $1,200,000 is allocated 
to the Port, and the remaining $48,600,000 is allocated to 
fund operations of the Municipal Railway. 

Following several years of efforts to automate and 
improve the efficiency of the citation and collection 
process, in August of 1997 DPT issued a Request for 
Proposals (RFP) for a comprehensive parking citation 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

18 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



PRWT 



• Lockheed Martin 



Duncan Management 
Solutions Ltd. 

Bank of America 

Direct Mail Center 

Ace Mailing 



processing and collections system that would supply the 
Department with three major system components: 

• A hand-held parking citation issuance and reporting 
system, consisting of electronic hand-held ticket 
writers, personal computers, supporting software, 
networking capabilities, and support services, 

• A parking citation processing system to serve as a 
central repository of information about citations issued 
and consisting of a variety of computer and hardware, 
software, management and support services, and 

• Support services of an Out-of-State and Special 
Collections Program, which will pursue collections 
from vehicles registered out of State and from 
motorists that have relocated, transferred vehicle 
ownership, or are otherwise difficult to collect, called 
special collections. 

DPT mailed the RFP to a list of 86 individuals and firms. 
DPT received six responses: four letters from companies 
declining to submit a proposal, one proposal for a single 
component of the project (which was therefore found to be 
non-responsive) and one proposal, which was considered 
to be responsive to the RFP, from PRWT Services Inc., 
who has formed a team of subcontractors to provide the 
broad range of services required under the RPF, as listed 
below: 

Project management, local operations, 
collections, training, and subcontractor 
reporting. 

Proprietary software system Ticket 
Information Management System (TIMS) to 
serve as the Parking Citation Processing 
System (PCPS) and interface with California 
and out of State Departments of Motor 
Vehicles (DMV). 

250 handheld ticket writers and a data 
capture system. 

Lockbox processing. 

Mailing services. 

Data entrv services. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

• Delta Computer Hardware procurement, network Solutions 

installation and maintenance, hardware 
training and support, and software 
engineering and development. 

The RFP was advertised in the San Francisco 
Independent for one day Tuesday August 19, 1997, in 
accordance with the requirements contained in Section 
16.112 of the Charter. Attachment 1 is a memo from DPT 
explaining why only one of the 86 individuals and firms 
which were notified of the RFP submitted a responsive 
bid. 

According to DPT, an Evaluation Committee consisting of 
seven City employees, including four staff members of 
DPT and one representative each from the Department of 
Telecommunications & Information Services, the 
Information Technology Group of the Trial Courts, and 
the Purchasing Department, reviewed the proposal. The 
evaluation process included a check of the references for 
PRWT, a review of the Dun & Bradstreet ratings of 
PRWT, cost comparison of upgrading the existing DPT 
system versus the PRWT contract versus developing an 
automated system with the PRWT features using City 
staff, a test comparison of handheld ticket writing devices 
(which led to the selection of Duncan Management 
Solutions), and site visits to and survey of other cities 
using PRWT, Lockheed, and/or Duncan handheld devices. 

In a Dun & Bradstreet report dated December 24, 1997, 
Dun & Bradstreet rated PRWT 1A3, which indicates a net 
worth in the range of $500,000-$750,000 and a "Fair" 
credit appraisal. "Fair" is the third of four rankings, with 
1 being High, 2 being Good, and 4 being Limited. 
According to the Dun & Bradstreet report, a fair rating 
was given to PRWT because the company owes four 
payments that are 60 days or more past due, which total 
$1,450. According to the Dun & Bradstreet report, in 
1996, PRWT had an annual income of $17,881,771, with 
retained earnings of $820,481. A comparison of PRWT's 
financial statements in June of 1997 and November of 
1997 shows an increased flow of income. The report also 
shows that there are no lawsuits, tax hens, or claims filed 
against PRWT, and that each of the officers of the 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
20 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



company has been employed since the founding in 1988. 
PRWT's CPA firm issued an opinion, dated December 31, 
1996, which stated that the company's financial 
statements meet generally accepted accounting principles 
and that the audit contains no qualifications. 

According to DPT, the Evaluation Committee determined 
that the proposal submitted by PRWT: (1) meets all of the 
technical and service requirements of the RFP, (2) offers 
substantial public service benefits and presents the best 
opportunity for modernizing the City's citation issuance 
and collection system, and (3) will result in an estimated 
net revenue increase of $971,400 to DPT in the first 
contract vear. 



Current DPT Citation Processing and Collections 

Parking citations are issued by Parking Control Officers 
(PCOs) who hand write violation information onto 
preprinted, duplicate citation forms. The citations are 
sent by courier to Bank of America, a DPT contractor who 
enters the handwritten data into a database. Within 10 to 
15 working days of citation issuance, the information is 
(1) transmitted to DPTs ticket database, which is actually 
maintained by the Information Management Division of 
the Trial Courts, (2) the name and address of the 
registered owner of the vehicle receiving the citation is 
retrieved from State DMV. and (3) notiScations are 
mailed to the registered owner. 

Citation recipients may request additional information 
about a citation or protest a citation from DPT in person, 
by telephone, or by mail. According to DPT, due to the 
degree of manual research required to locate citation 
information and the lack of integrated service delivery, 
such actions currently take four to six weeks to resolve. 

Citations may be paid in person at 1380 Howard Street, 
370 Grove Street, by telephone, or by mail. Mailed 
payments are sent to a post office lockbox, from which 
Bank of America collects, processes and deposits 
payments into the City's Parking Fine account within 24 
hours of receipt. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Julv 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Proposed PRWT Citation Processing 

Under the proposed contract with PRWT, PCOs would 
issue citations by entering the violation and vehicle data 
directly into an electronic handheld ticket writing device, 
which prints tickets on paper that is waterproof and tear 
resistant. At the end of each PCO shift, the handheld 
device will be downloaded into the DPT network 
database. Detailed information regarding each citation 
will be available to DPT the following day. Notifications 
could be mailed to registered owners as early as three 
working days after issuance. 

Under the proposed system, DPT staff will be able to 
conduct immediate, online research in order to provide 
service to citation recipients who request additional 
information about a citation or protest a citation. 

Citations may still be paid in person at 1380 Howard 
Street, 370 Grove Street, by telephone, or by mail. Mailed 
payments will be sent to the same post office lockbox, 
from which Bank of America will continue to collect, 
process and deposit payments the City's Parking Fine 
account within 24 hours davs. 



Benefits of the Proposed PRWT Contract 

The primary difference between the current DPT system 
of processing citations and the proposed system offered by 
the PRWT contract is that citation data will be input and 
managed electronically, instead of manually. According to 
DPT, integrated electronic data will lead to improved 
revenue collection, and expanded collection activities 
would be performed by PRWT. Access to electronic data 
will also improve the efficiency of DPT operations and 
increase the level of customer service. Finally, certain 
DPT citation processing costs will be borne by PRWT 
which will lead to additional savings. Each of these 
benefits is discussed below. 

Increase Revenue Collection 

Currently, DPT collects approximately 53 percent of 
parking citation fine revenue from recipients by issuing 
tickets and mailing notification to registered owners. 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
22 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Approximately 14 percent of fine revenue, along with late 
penalties, is collected by DMY (and forwarded to the City) 
during vehicle registration processes. Also, approximately 
2 percent of fine revenue is collected by City Tow after a 
vehicle has been towed and by the Residential Permit 
Program at the time a residential permit is issued or 
renewed. Overall, this results in a total DPT collection 
rate of 69 percent. 

As shown in Attachment 2, 2,274.000 parking citations 
were issued in FY 1997-98, with a total value of 
$72,173,913. Of this total value, $49,800,000 was 
collected, or approximately 69 percent, with 31 percent, or 
$22,373,913 uncollected. DPT estimates the value of 
uncollected citations between May 1994 and May 1998 as 
approximately $70,000,000. The amount is reduced each 
year as citations are either collected or expire as a result 
of the five year statue of limitations. 

Under the proposed contract with PRWT, DPT estimates 
that an additional two percent of parking fine revenue 
will be collected in the first contract year, increasing to 8 
percent by the fourth contract year, for a final collection 
rate of 77 percent for all citations issued. 1 DPT estimates 
that the two percent increased collection rate wiU yield 
increased revenues to DPT of $1,227,960 in the first 
contract year. Increased parking fine revenue collection 
will also result from the following activities: 

• Increased Enforcement 

Under the proposed PRWT contract, PCOs will be able to 
identify vehicles with five or more unpaid citations 
(scofflaws) because such information will be downloaded 
from the network database into the handheld devices each 
day. PCOs will then be able to boot or tow such scofflaw 
vehicles, and vehicle retrieval requires owners to pay the 
fines for all outstanding citations. Currently, the only way 
for scofflaws to be identified is bv PCOs themselves 



1 Based on DPT's experience and PRWT's experience in other cities, it is assumed that approximately 
20 percent of citations are ultimately uncollectable, largely due State law which allows vehicles to be 
transferred without payment of outstanding citations. As such, SO percent of citations are collectable 
and DPT expects to collect 77 percent under the contract with PRWT. The remaining 3 percent are 
either dismissed following protest, dismissed in lieu of community service, or are issued to vehicles 
that become totaled or non operational. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



recognizing a vehicle as having received several citations 
and then researching records to determine if there are 
five or more unpaid citations. 

• Special Collections 

Out-of-State Citations: Currently, DPT does not collect 
delinquent citations given to vehicles with Out-of-State 
licenses or to vehicles registered in California with Out-of- 
State owners. According to Mr. Shannon Anderson of 
DPT, such collections are not cost effective because they 
require a legal agreement with, and computer software 
specific to, each State. Under the proposed PRWT 
contract, Lockheed Martin, the subcontracted provider of 
the Ticket Information Management System (TIMS), has 
the necessary agreements and software for 49 states 
(except Arizona), the District of Columbia, and two 
Canadian Provinces. 

Difficult to Collect Citations: Citations issued to 
vehicles with owners that have relocated, transferred 
vehicle ownership, or received citations in rental cars 
require special collections activities. Currently, DPTs 
staffing and information management system does not 
allow cost effective special collections. However, under the 
proposed contract, PRWT will conduct skip tracing 
(specialized research to determine a person's 
whereabouts) and other methods to pursue citation 
recipients for payment. 

As shown in Attachment 2, special collection activities to 
be performed by PRWT are expected to yield additional 
revenues to DPT of $3,811,500 in the first contract year. 

Therefore, total estimated increased revenues in the first 
year equals $5,039,460 ($1,227,960 from the two percent 
increase in the collection rate and $3,811,500 from special 
collections). 

Improved Operational Efficiency and Customer Service 
In addition to increased revenue collection purported by 
DPT and PRWT, an integrated citation processing and 
collection system will also yield improved operational 
efficiency and customer service, which are non- 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



quantifiable benefits to the public and the City, as 
dascussed below. 

• Significant reduction in the number of citation errors 
caused by handwriting and data-entry practices as a 
result of implementing handheld ticket writing 
devices. 

According to DPT, approximately 90 percent of the errors 
on parking citations which lead to protest by motorists 
are caused by either illegible handwriting on the citation 
or data entry errors. Under the proposed contract with 
PRWT, both types of errors will be significantly reduced 
because the information for parking citations will be 
entered by a PCO directly into a handheld electronic 
ticket writing device, which will print the ticket in a 
computerized format. Data from the handheld devices will 
be downloaded into the network database at the end of 
each PCO shift, thereby eliminating the need for data 
entry. DPT estimates $1,234,406 in savings from the 
elimination of such errors, and this savings is included in 
DPTs estimates of increased collection rates. 

• More responsive and efficient service to citizens paying 
or protesting parking citations. 

Currently, parking citations are printed with the ten most 
common violations codes, descriptions, and the associated 
fine amounts. If a motorist is cited for one of these 
common violations, the PCO simply checks the 
appropriate box. However, if a motorist is cited for a 
violation not defined on the ticket, the PCO writes the 
numeric code for the violation and the fine amount. A 
description of the violation is not included, and this lack 
of information often leads to inquiry and/or protest, which 
is further complicated by the fact that it takes 10 -15 
working days for the Trial Courts' Simplified Automated 
Traffic System (SATS) to be updated and for microfilm of 
the citations to be available to DPT staff. As such, if a 
citizen inquires the day after a citation is issued, they are 
told to call back in ten days. 

Under the proposed contract, the handheld ticket writing 
devices will automatically print the violation code, a 
description of the violation and the fine amount, which 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
25 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Julv 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



DPT estimates will reduce the number of inquiries and 
increase DPT ability to respond to inquires and protests. 

• DPT will be able to identify stolen and abandoned 
vehicles more efficiently. 

Currently, a daily list of stolen vehicles is sent from the 
Police Department to DPT, which is copied and 
distributed to PCOs. Under the proposed system, license 
plate numbers of stolen vehicles will be input into the 
DPT network database, and uploaded into each handheld 
device. If a PCO enters the license of a stolen vehicle into 
the handheld device in order to issue a citation, a warning 
will be sounded and the PCO will be able to immediately 
notify DPT dispatch. 

• New management reports will be used to make better 
decisions about deployment, resulting in improved 
enforcement in problem areas. 

Currently, reports needed by DPT management to make 
deployment decisions require manual research. For 
example, if the DPT Enforcement Director wants to know 
the geographic distribution of citations issued in a 
particular neighborhood, an employee would have to 
manually search for citations issued by PCOs assigned to 
that area, and compile the geographic distribution of each 
citation. Under the proposed PRWT contract, such a 
report could be printed after following a quick, menu- 
driven query of the network database. 

• A new system for managing the residential parking 
permit program, which will improve sendee to the 
60,000 City residents using this program. 

Outstanding parking citations must be paid before a 
Residential Parking Permit is issued. Currently, DPT 
staff working in the Residential Parking Permit (RPP") 
Program are able to determine the total amount of 
outstanding parking citations issued to a vehicle only - no 
detail regarding citation codes, descriptions, citation date, 
or fine amounts is available. As such, residents typically 
submit inquiries to DPT, which as noted above, can take 
up to six weeks to research. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Under the proposed PRWT contract, a module of the 
Lockheed TIMS will be customized to meet RPP Program 
needs. The Residential Parking Permit computer system 
will then be integrated with the Citation Division, and 
detailed information will be accessible to the Residential 
Parking Permit staff. Notices of outstanding citations will 
be included with the renewal forms mailed to current 
holders of residential parking permits. According to DPT, 
by providing residents with advance notice of citations 
that must be paid, the process of renewing residential 
parking permits will be quicker and more responsive to 
citizens. 

• An expanded information system to support decision 
making in DPTs Hearing Division and Traffic 
Operations Division 

Citation protest is in two steps: first, an Administrative 
Review is conducted to consider the factual accuracy of a 
ticket. If a citation is upheld (found to be valid by the 
Administrative Review staff) a citizen may appeal the 
decision with the Hearing Division. Currently, Hearing 
Officers must retrieve a microfilm copy of the original 
citation and must conduct manual research in order to 
respond to citizen claims. Under the proposed automated 
information system offered by PRWT, an electronic 
version of the original citation will be available at even- 
Hearing Officer's personal computer. According to DPT, 
this will significantly reduce the wait time required to 
schedule a hearing and the turnaround time for a 
decision. 

SATS, the current citation information management 
system used by the Trial Courts, evolved from the 
criminal court calendaring system. It was not designed to 
be used as an information system for parking tickets. 
Under TIMS, the Ticket Information Management 
System provided by the subcontractor Lockheed Martin, 
Hearing Officers (and all qualified DPT staff) will be able 
to access menus and screens showing all information 
related to a particular citation. 

The proposed contract with PRWT also includes a 
messaging system that would be used to relay information 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



gathered by PCOs in the field about broken meters, curbs 
that need painting, and signs in need of repair or 
replacement to the Traffic Operations Division. Currently, 
information about meters, curbs, and signs is gathered by 
conducting routine surveys and inspections performed in 
response to protests. 

DPT Savings 

In addition to the above described collection 
enhancements, the proposed contract with PRWT includes 
provisions which will lead to savings of current DPT costs: 
(1) PRWT would assume the $300,000 annual fee for 
Lockbox processing, (2) PRWT will provide the special 
paper used to print the new electronic citations, a savings 
of $300,000 annually, (3) use of handheld ticket writing 
devices will reduce the data entry requirements by 
$400,000, and (4) various savings in microfilm costs, DPT 
forms, and production and mailing of notices which total 
S300,000, for a total annual savings of current DPT costs 
of SI, 300,000. DPT savings are reflected in the cost- 
benefit analysis shown in Attachment 4. 

The Mayor's recommended FY 1998-99 budget included 
net increased expenditures for the PRWT contract, less 
DPT expenditure savings, based on a contract start date 
of October 1, 1998. Likewise, Parking Fine revenue 
transferred to the Muni has also been included in the 
budget based on a system start date of October 1, 1998. 
Presently however, the system is not expected to be fully 
implemented until January 1, 1999. Mr. Matthew Hymel, 
Mayor's Director of Finance, states that any shortfall in 
Muni's Parking Fine revenues will be offset by decreased 
expenditures for contract payments to PRWT. 

Cost of the Proposed Contract with PRWT 

The cost of the proposed PRWT contract, shown in 
Attachment 3, is based on a fee per parking citation 
issued. In FY 1997-98, DPT issued 2,274,000 parking 
citations, which DPT assumes to be constant throughout 
the proposed four year contract with PRWT. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 





PRWT 


PRWT 


PRWT 


PRWT 


Citation Processed 


Year 1 


Year 2 


Year 3 


Year 4 


per Year 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


First 2 million 


S2.39 


$2.34 


$2.29 


$2.29 


Next 250,000 


$2.19 


$2.14 


$2.09 


$2.09 


Next 250,000 


SI. 69 


$1.64 


$1.59 


$1.59 


Next 250,000 


$1.18 


$1.14 


$1.13 


$1.13 


Next 250,000 


$0.93 


$0.93 


$0.93 


$0.93 


Over 3 million 


$0.73 


$0.73 


$0.73 


$0.73 



Using the pricing structure above and assuming issuance 
of 2,274,000 citations, the total costs for the first year of 
the PRWT contract would be $5,368,060. Such costs will 
decline each year, until year four when the cost of 
processing the same 2,274,000 citations would be 
$5,140,660. By pricing the contract using a fee per 
citation structure, the contract provides that if fewer 
citations are issued, the cost is reduced. If ticket issuance 
is higher than expected, the cost (and related revenue) 
increases. 

In addition to the fee per citation, PRWT will receive 34 
percent of all fees collected on Out-of-State and special 
collection citations that are referred by DPT and for which 
DPT and the City is otherwise unable to collect through 
its regular collection processes. The City will receive the 
remaining 66 percent on such special collections. 



Summarized Cost-Benefit Analysis 

A summarized Cost-Benefit Analysis for the proposed 
contract with PRWT. as prepared by DPT is shown in 
detail in Attachment 4, as follows: 



Year 1 



Year 2 



Year 3 



Year 4 



Contract Cost ($5,368,060) ($5,254,360) ($5,140,660) ($5,140,660) 

Savings in DPT costs 1,300,000 1,300,000 1,300,000 1,300,000 
Additional Revenues 5.039.460 5.095.920 4.508.880 4.911.840 



Net Revenue $971,400 $1,141,560 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



$668,220 $1,071,180 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



DPT's estimate shows additional costs of $5,368,060 to 
process tickets, offset in the first contract year by savings 
of $1,300,000 and additional revenues (benefits) of 
$5,039,460, for a net revenue gain of $971,400 in the first 
contract year. 



Proposition J 

The proposed resolution, File 98-1111, under Charter 
Section 10.104.15, would approve the Proposition J 
Controller's certification that the services to be provided 
an automated Parking Citation Processing and Collection 
system can be practically performed by a private 
contractor at a lower cost for Fiseal Year 1998-99 than 
similar services provided by City and County employees. 

The Controller has determined that Parking Citation 
Processing and Collection System for FY 1998-99 would 
result in estimated savings as follows: 

Citv Operated Service Costs Step 1 Step 5 

Personnel Costs: 

Salaries $605,111 $715,783 

Fringe Benefits 174.122 191.176 

Total Estimated City Cost 779,233 906,959 

Estimated Contractual 

Services Cost 647,752 647.752 

Estimated Savings $131,481 $259,207 

Comments: 1. If this subject legislation is approved, under the 

proposed contract, DPT and PRWT would phase in the 
delivery of training and equipment needed for PCOs to 
begin using handheld electronic ticket writing devices. 
DPT expects full use of handheld devices by PCOs six 
months after Full System Acceptance (see Comment 2). 

2. According to Mr. Anderson, the City's continued 
collection of parking citation revenue is protected by 
several provisions in the proposed contract with PRWT, 
including: (1) a $500,000 performance bond through the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



term of the contract, (2) in the event of default by the 
primary contractor, PRWT's subcontracts would be 
assigned to the City, thereby ensuring continued 
performance under the contract by the subcontractors, (3) 
in the event that the contract is terminated before the 
term end, the City will have access to the source code for 
the software for the ticket information management 
system and all supporting subsystems, which will be kept 
in escrow throughout the term of the contract, the City 
will have the option of purchasing the hardware, and all 
existing data would be accessible to the City, (4) a 
$5,000,000 fidelity bond in the event of employee or 
corporate theft, (5) liquidated damages for PRWT's failure 
to meet specified performance standards and (6) there 
must be Full System Acceptance by DPT, defined by nine 
different steps that must be achieved, before the City 
accepts the system and begins payment to PRWT. The 
contract states that FuD System Acceptance must occur 
within 90 days. There is no payment to PRWT until Full 
System Acceptance is achieved; however, there is also no 
penalty if PRWT fails to meet the 90 day deadline. Until 
Full System Acceptance is achieved, DPT will continue 
processing citations and collecting fine revenues using 
current practices. 

According to Ms. Angela Karikas of the City Attorney's 
Office, the above protections were drafted specifically to 
protect the revenue stream the City receives from parking 
citations under the proposed contract with PRWT. 

3. Mr. Anderson states that if none of the expected 
increases in citations collections are realized, thereby 
resulting in no net gain to the City and leaving the City 
owing PRWT $5,368,060 in contract fees the first year, 
the City would have several options that could be used 
separately or in combination to reduce or prevent a 
revenue shortfall, including: (1) increase parking citation 
fines, (2) modify deployment of PCOs to yield issuance of 
higher value citations, and (3) increase the number of 
citations issued. 

4. According to Mr. Anderson, DPT negotiated a contract 
which obtained for the City a more favorable price per 
citation payable to PRWT (see Attachment 3) than any 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



other City currently under contract with PRWT/Lockheed 
for similar services. For example, the City of Los Angeles 
pays $2.44 per citation for the first 2.4 million citations 
versus $2.39 for the first 2.0 million citations and $2.19 
for the next 250,000 citations under this proposed 
contract. 

5. As noted above, the proposed PRWT contract includes 
Lockheed Martin as a subcontractor providing TIMS, a 
proprietary software Ticket Information Management 
System and interface with California and Out-of-State 
Department of Motor Vehicle Agencies. In DPT's 
evaluation of the PRWT proposal, DPT considered the fact 
that the State of California Child Welfare Agency 
cancelled a development contract with Lockheed Martin 
due to disagreements about the scope of work and 
nonperformance. According to Mr. Anderson, DPT is 
comfortable with Lockheed Martin's participation in the 
PRWT contract because the company is using a proven 
product which is satisfactorily employed in 80 other 
California cities and 20 cities nationwide. 

6. According to Mr. Anderson, the added efficiencies that 
would be gained by the proposed contract with PRWT to 
automate citation information will result in better 
customer service. Mr. Anderson reports that currently 
there is limited staff to be responsive to public inquiry at 
the 1380 Howard Street window and on the telephone. As 
a consequence of having a high volume of manual work, 
the public is often given long wait times, incomplete and 
delayed responses, and a lack of listening time from DPT 
staff. Mr. Anderson advises that with an automated 
system for managing and retrieving citation information, 
all aspects of public interaction regarding citation 
processing and collection will be faster and more accurate. 

7. According to DPT, approximately 94 percent of the 
parking citations issued in the City are issued by DPT's 
Parking Control Officers (PCOs). The remaining 6 percent 
are issued by Police Officers and other ticketing agencies 
including the Community College District. If the proposed 
contract is approved, handheld electronic ticket writing 
devices would be provided to all DPT PCOs; however, 
SFPD and other ticketing agencies would continue to 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



issue hand written parking citations, whach would be 
processed in the same manner currently used for hand 
written parking citations, except that the data would be 
entered by Ace Mailing, the data entry subcontractor in 
the proposed contract, instead of Bank of America. 

8. According to references included in PRWT's proposal 
shown in Attachment 7, which have verified by DPT 
according to Mr. Anderson, PRWT/Lockheed is currently 
contracted to provide similar services to Los Angeles, 
Boston, Philadelphia, the District of Columbia, and New 
Orleans. The Duncan Management System handheld 
devices are currently being used in Los Angeles, Denver, 
and Tallahassee. 

9. The Controller's supplemental Proposition J 
questionnaire, with DPT's responses, is Attachment 5. 

10. As shown in the summary of costs and benefits on 
page 29, increased revenues of $5,039,460 plus savings in 
DPT costs of $1,300,000 (for a total benefit of $6,339,460) 
are expected to exceed increased contract payments of 
$5,368,060 by $971,400 during the first full year of 
operation under the proposed contract. However, in the 
proposed contract with PRWT, there is no guarantee of 
increased revenue and no penalties are assigned to the 
contractor in the event that increased revenues are not 
realized. Therefore a degree of risk is associated with the 
implementation of the proposed contract in that increased 
revenues may not be realized in sufficient amounts to 
offset the increased costs for parking citation processing. 
As stated in Comment 3, above, DPT reports that the City 
would have several options to reduce or prevent a revenue 
shortfall, include: (1) increasing the parking citation fines, 
(2) modifying the deployment of PCOs to yield issuance of 
higher value citations, and (3) increasing the number of 
citations issued. Such options pose significant policy 
issues and therefore may not be implemented. Therefore, 
because of the risk that increased revenues may not be 
realized, and because the DPT's solutions to such a loss of 
revenue would require consideration of significant policy 
issues that may not be implemented, the Budget Analyst 
concludes that approval of the proposed contract is a 
policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Recommendations: 1. Approve the proposed resolution, File 98-1111, the 

Controller's Proposition J certification. 

2. Approval of the proposed resolution, File 98-1083, to 
authorize the proposed contract, is a policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



JUL. - 1 5* 98 (WED) 12 = 18 CITY k CO OF S. F. PARKING DEPT TE1/.415 oo4 9M P. 002 

City and County of San Franclaco 



BAN PRANCI8CO 




Attachment 1 
Page 1 or x 



DEPARTMENT OF PAHKINQ j THAFHC 



WILLIE LEWIS BROWN. JR., Mayor 

STUART a SUNSHINE. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

MEMORANDUM 




July 15, 1998 



TO: Taylor Emerson, Budeet Analyst 

FROM: Steve Bell, Contract Administrator 



RE: Response to Question on "Why DPT Received only one Bid" in Response to RFP for a 

Comprehensive Citation Processing and Collections System, including Hand Helds 



Here is some background information related to the response the Department received to its RFP. 

At the time the RFP for citation processing services was being drafted, there were discussions among 
DPT, Trial Courts and DT1S staff and the consultant about competition in this industry and the ability 
of potential vendors to meet the City's requirements. Tnis group realized that the number of qualified 
firms for the citation processing component may be as few as three or four. We also realized that a 
piecemeal approach to contracting for the three major components (citation processing, hand held 
ticket writers and miscellaneous &. out-of-state collections) would leave the Department with a 
significant number of technical coordination issues related to the vendors' information systems, as 
well as a diluted state of contractor accountability and operational efficiency. As a result of these 
discussions, and in the interest of encouraging competitive proposals and local vendor participation, 
the Department chose an RFP approach in which a primary contractor could form a team of qualified 
vendors and coordinate technical and implementation issues to meet the City's requirements. 

The Department was disappointed that only one responsive proposal was received and the Evaluation 
Committee and our consultant speculated the reasons why. Much of this speculation was based on 
certain information that the Committee had obtained during the development of the RFP and client 
reference checks. This information included: 

Lockheed Martin EMS was one of only two firms which had significant experience in processing 
large volumes of parking citation data in the U.S. (the other firm is EDS). 
EDS, which had recently completed negotiations with Toronto officials for the sale/licensing of 
their software, told Toronto officials that it was no longer pursuing contracts for parking citation 
processing services and was only interested in selling and/or licensing its software. 



(415)E54-PARK FAX (415) 5544634 26 Van Nms Avsnu«. Suite 410 6an Frandicc. CA M1Q2-457B 

35 



Attachment 1 
Page 2 of 2 



. Knowledge thai the City of Oakland had entered into a contract for citation processing services 
with a firm which didn't have a proven system and ended resulted in significant revenue losses 
due to the contractor's poor performance (see attached article). 

• Los Angeles Dept. of Transportation officials informed us that only two firms submitted 

responses to their RPP (which was for services similar to those in the City's RFP). The two firms 
were the Lockheed/PR WT team and the City of Inglewood. Los .Angeles officials informed us 
that the City of Inglewood was not able to provide all the requested services and that they rejected 
the Inglewood bid as non-responsive. 

There were several vendors who responded to our RFP but chose not to bid. These companies 
included: Clancy Systems International, KPMG Peat Marwick, Software Science, Inc and Turbo Data 
Systems, Inc. I have attached a copy of the letters we received from these organizations. 



36 



Attachment 



Parking Citation Revenues 





Baseline Data 
















-. 


Total Citations Issued 




2.274.000 












2 


Total Net Revenue 


S 49.800.000 














Average Citation Payment 


S 


33.00 












■. 


Average Bail Amount 


s 


27.00 












■ 


Current Collection Rate 




69% 












■ 


Number of payments 




1.569.050 
Yearl 




Year 2 




Year 3 


Year 4 




Citations Issued 




2.274.000 




2.274.000 




2.274.000 


2.274.000 


7 


Addt'l payments per 1 % increase 




22.740 




22.740 




22.740 


22.740 


8 


Collection Rate 




71% 




73% 




75% 


77% 


9 


% Increase in collection rate 




2% 




4% 




6% 


8% 


10 


Total addt'l payments 




45.480 




90.960 




'35.440 


181.920 


11 


Average payment amount 


s 


27.00 


S 


27.00 


S 


2700 S 


27.00 


12 


Additional revenues 
Special Collections 


s 


1.227.960 


1 


2.455.920 


I 


3.683.880 S 


4.91 1 B4 


















13 


Est'd value of unpaid citations 


S 70.000.000 


S 40.000.000 


S 10.000.000 




14 


Est. of collectible portion 


S 17.500.000 


S 10.000.000 


s 


2.500.000 




15 


Projection of actual recoveries 


S 


5.775.000 


s 


4.000.000 


s 


1.250.000 




16 


Less vendor fee of 34% 


s 


1.963.500 


: 


1.360.000 


s 


425.000 




17 


Additional revenues to DPT 
Total additional revenues 


s 


3.811.500 


1 


2.640.000 


1 


625.000 




18 


s 


5.039.460 


s 


5,095.920 


s 


4.508.880 S 


4.911. 840 



1 Based on FY 98-99 DPT Preliminary Budget Forecast 

2 Based on FY 97-98 DPT Budget 

3 Based on analysis of three years data from Citation database: venfied through sampling 

4 Based on two years data on all citations issued. 

5 Based on analysis of three years data from Citation database; verified through sampling. 

6 The number of payments based on a 69% collection rate times the number of citations issued 

7 Calculation of 1% times the number of citations issued 

8 Projected collection rate to be achieved by vendor in each successive year of the contract. 

9 Net increase in collection rate. 

10 Additional payments as calculated by the % increase times number of citations issued. 

1 1 Average bail amount of citations issued. 

12 The number of addt'l payments times average payment amount. 

13 Estimated value of unpaid citations dating back to fall 1994; the amount is reduced each year as ticKets 
are either collected or pass the five-year statute of limitations. 

14 Based on PRWT/Lockheed's experience in other cities, especially Los Angeles, approx. 20% of all 
citations are ultimately uncollectible; consequently only a portion (up to 80% of all tickets issued) can 
be reasonably expected to be collectible accounts. 

15 Within the portion of backlog tickets which may be collectible, we estimate an actual collection 
rate of 33%, 40% and 50% in the first, second and third year of the contract resoectively. 

16 The vendor's fee on special collections is 34% of the amount collected. 

17 Net revenue DPT receives after vendor's fee. 

18 Total revenues from increased collection rate and special collections. 



37 



Citation Processing Fees 



Attachment 3 



Fee Structure 




Yearl 


Year 2 


Year 3 


Year 4 


First 2 miliion 




2.39 


2.34 


2.29 


2.29 


next 250K 




2.19 


2.14 


2.09 


2.09 


next 250K 




1.69 


1.64 


1.59 


1.59 


next 250K 




1.18 


1.14 


1.13 


1.13 


next 250K 




0.93 


0.93 


0.93 


0.93 


over 3 million 




0.73 


0.73 


0.73 


0.73 


Citations Issued/Processed 


1998-99 


1999-00 


2000-01 


2001-02 


First 2 million 




2,000,000 


2,000,000 


2,000,000 


2,000,000 


next 250K 




250,000 


250,000 


250,000 


250,000 


next 250K 




24,000 


24,000 


24,000 


24,000 


next 250K 




- 


- 


- 


- 


next 250K 












Total Citations Issi 


ed/Processed 


2,274,000 


2,274,000 


2,274,000 


2,274,000 


Costs 




Year 1 


Year 2 


Year 3 


Year 4 


First 2 million 




4,780,000 


4,680,000 


4,580,000 


4,580,000 


next 250K 




547,500 


535,000 


522,500 


522,500 


next 250K 




40,560 


39,360 


38,160 


38,160 


next 250K 




- 


- 


- 


- 


next 250K 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Total Processing 


Costs 


$ 5,368,060 


$ 5,254,360 


$ 5,140,660 


S 5,140,660 



38 



c 
o 

o 
at 

"6 

i_ 

Q. 






o 
o 

c 



o 
ra 

o 

en 

c 



3 (M (S 
3. fsi ». 



CM r- 





<D 


M 




a 


a> 






1) 




</) 






O 




a 





c 


i_ 


fl) 







; ■) 


</> 


JQ 


IB 


a> 


5 


> 






^ 


< 


_ 



m o 2 






** c 



O 0) 







5 








- 








~ 
















c 






10 









O 


jj 






t 


•-'. 




1- 








0. 


O 






Q 
O 


u 

"to 








1/) 


h- 




'i 








c 
g. 


in 
O 



00 


£ 


a> 

c 






n 


^. 



Attachment k 
Page 1 of 2 



^ s 



O CO O CO 

r-- co o eo 

m* if>* co 

tO M O 

o co in 



01 CM O CM 
f- O) O C> 



- o w 

c 5 o 

.2 o o 

o M p 



- <n i: 



75 E 



o £ 



«)_•-= 



c c r ~ ^ 

© o cj o — t 

> = > > ^3 — 

O O 0> 0) "D o 

cc u q: cc < z 



■>- CM CO tt 



39 



a> g 2- 






1-5 

03 9- 



= "O O) 



03 . = 03 



Attacnment A 
Page 2 of 2 



■a _□ =5 



O OJ O c 



'— csi o 



"5 (B r o 



IDs 01 a 






03 u, 



UJ Z < CL 



U) 



? 5 | | 



y> — .£ 



5 "^ .2 u 

> 5 M o 





CO 


SI 03 


h- 


o 


i -5 


n 


o 


D 

o 


o 

C/3 


03 m 
03 -Q 



1»- c o 



y 

o. 
o ° a 

£1 S 2 



~ E > 



03 o i: 



»— 


m 


ro 


a> 


0) 


c 


3 


! 





C 


C 







fl> 




> 


> 


a 


0) 


0) 





cr 


K 


< 



C3 O t- CM CO 



40 



Attachment 5 
Page 1 of 2 

CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 

DEPARTMENT: Parking And Traffic 

CONTRACT SERMCES: Parking Citation Processing And Collections Svstem 
CONTRACT PERIOD: Four vears from the date of approval and acceptance 

(1) Who performed the activity/service prior to contracting out 

• The computer processing is being performed (on a limited scale) by the Trial 
Court Computer Information Services Group. 

• The Residential Parking Permit System software is owned by a private company 
with maintenance being contracted to the owner developer of the programs. 

• The City does not currently use handheld ticket writing devices or related 
sofrvi'are. 

• The City does not have resources to pursue Out of Stale and Miscellaneous 
Collections. 

(2) How many City employees were laid off as a result of contracting out 

No City employees will be laid off as a result of this contract being awarded 

(3) Explain the disposition of employees if they were laid off. 
N/A 

(4) What percentage of City employees' time is spent of services to be contracted out 9 

The services to be provided by the contractor are so integral to our operations that 
we will monitor the contractor 's performance on a daily basis at mimeroits levels of 
services provided In addition to the above the Departments Contract Administrator 
is estimated to spend an average of 25% of his time in monitoring this contract. 

(5) How long have the services been contracted out? Is this likely to be a one-time or an 
ongoing request for contracting out 

This will be an on-going request for contracting out the total package of services. 

(6) What was the first fiscal year for a Proposition J Certification? Has it been certified 
for each subsequent year? 

N/A 



hi 



At uacnment p 
i'aee 2 or 2 



(7) How will the services meet the goals of your MBE/WBE Action Plan? 

The se7-vices are in compliance with our MBE/WBE Action Plan and have been 
certified by HRC. 

(8) Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance for its 
employees? Even if not required, are health benefits provided? 

The proposed contract has not begun but does not require the contractor to provide 
health insurance benefits. However, the contractor does provide health benefits to 
their employees 

(9) Does the proposed contractor provide benefits to employees with spouses? Is so, are 
the same benefits provided to employees with domestic partners? If not, how does 
the proposed contractor comply with the Domestic Partners ordinance: 

The proposed contractor provides benefits to employees with spouses. The Proposed 
contractor will extend the same benefits to domestic partners with the next open 
period for enrollment. The proposer has been in communication with Cynthia 
Goldstein and she is satisfied that the proposer is earnestly intending to comply with 
the City 's Domestic Partners ordinance.. 



Department Representative: Steve Bell 

Telephone Number: 554-9S25 



hi 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 6 - File 98-1151 



Department: 



Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 

Community Substance Abuse Services (CSAS) Division 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Public Health 
(DPH), Community Substance Abuse Services (CSAS), to 
enter into a Combined Negotiated Net Amount (NNA) and 
Drug/Medi-Cal Agreement for the period July 1, 1998 
through June 30, 1999 with the State of California, 
Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs (DADP), in 
the amount of $15,986,354, as a condition of receiving 
State funds for substance abuse treatment; holding the 
State DADP harmless from any and all claims resulting 
from the agreement; authorizing and designating the 
Director of Community Substance Abuse Services to sign 
said agreement and to approve amendments, without 
subsequent approval of the Board of Supervisors, if such 
amendments result in less than 10 percent of the 
agreement amount. 

$15,986,354 

State of California, Department of Alcohol and Drug 
Programs (DADP) 

Under State law, San Francisco is reimbursed by the 
State DADP for the City's costs associated with providing 
various substance abuse services. In order to receive this 
reimbursement, which amounts to $15,986,354 in State 
funds for FY 1998-99, the City must enter into a 
"Combined Net Negotiated Amount and Drug/Medi-Cal 
Agreement" with the State. This proposed resolution, 
which would authorize the Department of Public Health 
(DPH) to enter into the agreement with the State, is 
consistent with the funds approved in DPH's FY 1998-99 
budget. 

The Community Substance Abuse Services (CSAS) 
Division of DPH currently funds approximately 41 
different alcohol and drug programs through a variety of 
non-profit organizations and agencies. Counties negotiate 
with the State to determine rates for different types of 
substance abuse services, and these rates are then 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

43 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

incorporated into an agreement between the State and 
the County for a total "net negotiated amount." Mr. Jim 
Stillwell of CSAS advises that the Net Negotiated Amount 
(NNA) refers to the amount of State DADP funds and 
Federal block grant funds for substance abuse services to 
be provided by the State DADP to the City. 

The City also enters into an annual agreement with the 
State DADP, the "Drug/Medi-Cal Agreement," under 
which the City is reimbursed for substance abuse services 
provided to Medi-Cal recipients. Mr. Stillwell reports 
that, although the Net Negotiated Amount Agreement 
and the Drug/Medi-Cal Agreement have in the past come 
to the Board of Supervisors for approval as two separate 
agreements, since FY 1996-97, the State DADP has 
combined the NNA funds and the Drug/Medi-Cal 
reimbursement into one agreement, known as the 
Combined Agreement. The proposed resolution would 
approve the Combined Net Negotiated Amount and 
Drug/Medi-Cal Agreement for FY" 1998-99. 

Comments: 1. Since the Combined Agreement for FY 1998-99 

commenced on July 1, 1998, the proposed resolution 
should be amended to provide for retroactive approval. 

2. The Combined Agreement for FY* 1998-99 would result 
in payment by the State DADP of $15,986,354. or 
$1,144,714 less than the year-end Combined Agreement 
for FY* 1997-98 of $17,131,068. Mr. Stillwell reports that 
the reduction in funding provided under the FY 1998-99 
Combined Agreement from the level of the FY 1997-98 
Combined Agreement results from: 

• A reduction of approximately $372,000 in one-time 
Federal block grant funding used to alleviate the 
termination of eligibility for Supplemental Security 
Income (SSI) of persons with substance abuse 
problems; 

• A reduction of $360,000 for a payment by the State 
during FY 1997-98 for the City's treatment of out-of- 
county Drug/Medi-Cal clients; 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



• A reduction of $250,000 in funds carried forward by 
CSAS from its FY 1996-97 budget; 

• Other reductions of approximately $163,000 for one- 
time funding from the State and Federal governments; 

• Mr. Stillwell states that the FY 1998-99 Combined 
Agreement was prepared by the State prior to 
approval of the State budget. Therefore, as in prior 
years, Mr. Stillwell states that the CSAS expects the 
FY 1998-99 Combined Agreement to be amended at a 
later date to provide approximately $545,000 in 
increased funding. 

3. Mr. Stillwell advises that the revenue of $15,986,354 
for the FY 1998-99 Combined Agreement has been 
included in CSAS's FY 1998-99 budget, as approved by 
the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Stillwell further advises 
that the subject funds are expended in combination with 
local substance abuse funding for approximately 41 
contracts with non-profit service providers. Such 
contracts are approved by the Board of Supervisors as 
part of the annual CSAS budget. 

4. The proposed Combined Agreement includes a hold 
harmless clause which provides that the City will hold the 
State harmless from (1) any claims and losses incurred by 
contractors, subcontractors, individuals, firms and 
corporations furnishing or supphying work services, 
materials or supplies in connection with the performance 
of this contract; and (2) any claims and losses incurred by 
any person, firm or corporation who may be injured or 
damaged in connection with the City's performance of this 
contract. Ms. Paula Jesson of the City Attorney's Office 
advises that this a standard State hold harmless 
provision, and that it is reasonable for the City to enter 
into this agreement as it is drafted. 

5. The proposed Combined Agreement would authorize 
the Director of CSAS to approve contract amendments 
totaling less than 10 percent of the contract amount, or up 
to $1,598,635, without subsequent Board of Supervisors 
approval. However, CSAS would be required to obtain 
approval from the Board of Supervisors for supplemental 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

appropriation requests to expend any increased revenue 
resulting from such amendments to the Combined 
Agreement with the State. 

6. Mr. Stillwell advises that State Assembly Bill 2071 
(AB 2071), enacted in 1996, requires all counties to 
submit a Board of Supervisors approved Combined 
Agreement for FY 1998-99 to the State DADP effective 
July 1, 1998. According to Mr. Stillwell, AB 2071 further 
provides that, if Board of Supervisors approval is not 
submitted to the DADP by July 31, 1998, the DADP is 
required to assume direct administration of Drug/Medi- 
Cal contracts, and to reduce the County's allocation by the 
amount of the Drug/Medi-Cal reimbursement, the State 
General Fund match, and an administrative fee of 
$16,000 per subcontract. 

7. As previously indicated, approval of the proposed 
Combined Net Negotiated Amount and Drug/Medi-Cal 
Agreement is consistent with the funds previously 
appropriated by the Board of Supervisors in the DPH's FY 
1998-99 budget, and such approval is required by the 
State. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to provide for retroactivity 

and approve the resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Julv 22. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 



File 98-1140 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Trial Courts 

Real Estate Department 

Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to enter 
into an agreement with the Hastings College of the Law, 
which will permit Hastings College to use the new Trial 
Courts Building at 400 McAllister Street, specifically 
three jury rooms and one multi-purpose room (total of 
four rooms), two hours daily at the rate of $35.00 per 
room per day, beginning August 24, 1998 and ending 
December 3, 1998. 

The Hastings College of the Law has requested 
permission from the City to use four rooms in the new 
Courthouse building between August 24, 1998 and 
December 3, 1998. Hastings College would use these 
rooms, consisting of three jury rooms and one multi- 
purpose room, for a period of two hours on weekday 
afternoons (the period when these rooms are not in use by 
the Courts), in order to teach legal writing and legal 
research classes. 



The proposed resolution would authorize the City 
Administrator to issue a revocable permit to Hastings 
College for the use of Courthouse Rooms 207, 509, 603 
and 609 for the period from August 24, 1998 through 
December 3, 1998. Under the terms of the agreement, 
Hastings College would pay the Trial Courts $35.00 per 
room per day ($140 per day for all four rooms), or a total 
of $8,820 for 63 days over a 3 1/2 month period, prior to 
the first day of classes. In addition, no room would be 
used for more than two hours daily, and not before 3:30 
p.m. or after 6:30 p.m., a period when these rooms are not 
typically used by the Courts. The proposed resolution 
further provides that the use of these rooms by Hastings 
College would not interfere with Trial Courts business or 
with the provision of janitorial or security services by the 
City. Hastings College would be responsible for providing 
liability insurance and workers compensation insurance, 
while the City would agree to provide all utilities. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

47 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



1. According to the Department of Real Estate (DREj. 
under the terms of the Certificates of Participation that 
financed the Courthouse's construction, the City 
Administrator is authorized to issue a permit for use of 
the Courthouse. 



2. Mr. Lawrence Jacobson of DRE advises that $35.00 per 
room per day represents the fair market value for this 
space. 

3. Mr. Neal Taniguchi of the Trial Courts advises that 
the Trial Courts concur with the proposed issuance of a 
permit to Hastings College for the use of space at the new 
Courthouse. Mr. Taniguchi further advises that Hastings 
College's use of space at the Courthouse would not 
interfere with Court business because these four rooms 
are not usually used by the Courts between 3:30 p.m. and 
6:30 p.m. 

4. Mr. Taniguchi reports that the $8,820 in additional 
revenue to be generated from the proposed agreement has 
not been included in the Trial Courts' FY 1998-99 budget. 
The expenditure of such additional revenues would 
therefore be subject to appropriation approval of the 
Board of Supervisors. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

48 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 8 - File 98-1178 



Department: Tax Collector 

Item: Resolution authorizing the Tax Collector to cancel the tax 

deed issued to the purchaser of 43 Crescent Avenue and 45 
Crescent Avenue following the September 26, 1997 public 
auction of tax defaulted property and to refund to the 
purchaser the bid amount (purchase price) and other monies 
paid by the purchaser to the City that were related to the 
property, plus interest. 

Description: The proposed resolution would authorize the Tax Collector to 

cancel the tax deed issued to the purchaser of a lot 
containing a single family residence at 45 Crescent Avenue 
and a lot at 43 Crescent Avenue containing a two-unit 
apartment building which were mistakenly sold by the Tax 
Collector as a single vacant lot at a public auction. The 
proposed resolution also authorizes a refund to the 
purchaser, estimated at $17,172, of the purchase price and 
other monies paid by the purchaser to the City that were 
related to the property, including interest, as described 
below. 

The events leading up to the erroneous sale of the property 
by the Tax Collector, according to Ms. Sandra Schaefer of the 
City Attorney's Office, are as follows: 

The lot located at 45 Crescent Avenue contains one single 
family residence which is built side by side to a second lot at 
43 Crescent Avenue containing one apartment building with 
two units. The two buildings appear to be one structure but 
are actually two separate structures. Both of the lots at 45 
Crescent Avenue and 43 Crescent Avenue are owned by the 
same owner. Each lot should have been assessed by the 
Assessor's Office separately as an improved lot. However, 
dating back to 1904, the Assessor's Office has mistakenly 
assessed 45 Crescent Avenue as a "vacant" lot and 43 
Crescent Avenue as an improved lot, including the value of 
both the single family residence located at 45 Crescent 
Avenue and the apartment building at 43 Crescent Avenue 
in one assessment. 

The owner of the two lots has been billed by the Tax 
Collector for the "vacant" lot at 45 Crescent Avenue and the 
improved lot at 43 Crescent Avenue since 1904. However, at 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

49 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

some point after 1985, an escrow account was set up by the 
lender for the two lots and the lender erroneously began 
paying only the Property Taxes to the City for the improved 
lot at 43 Crescent Avenue (which included both of the 
buildings in the assessment) and not for the "vacant" lot at 
45 Crescent Avenue, under the belief that, since the 
assessments for both buildings were being paid, the Property 
Taxes were being paid in full. 

In accordance with the State Revenue and Taxation Code, 
once Property Taxes had not been paid on the "vacant" lot at 
45 Crescent Avenue for over five years, the Tax Collector 
followed procedures to seize and sell the property, including 
notifying the owner. Receiving no response from the owner, 
the Tax Collector sold the "vacant" lot at public auction on 
September 26, 1997, to Mr. Kenneth J.H. Chui in the amount 
of $15,000. 

Further complicating the matter, the deed for the property at 
45 Crescent Avenue issued by the City to Mr. Chui was 
incorrect. The deed correctly listed only the Assessor's Lot 
Number for the "vacant" lot at 45 Crescent Avenue. 
However, the "metes and bounds" description included in the 
deed, a legal description of the boundaries of the property, 
was erroneously copied from the original recorded deed for 
the property and describes a boundary which includes both of 
the lots at 45 Crescent Avenue and 43 Crescent Avenue, 
instead of only the lot at 45 Crescent Avenue. As a result, 
the tax deed issued by the Tax Collector could be construed 
as having sold two improved lots instead of one vacant lot, 
which was in default according to the Tax Collector's records. 

Mr. Chui has agreed to surrender the tax deed and has 
signed a written consent to cancel the deed with the 
agreement that the City reimburse Mr. Chui $15,000 for the 
purchase price of the property which Mr. Chui paid to the 
City, plus interest at the rate the City earns on pooled cash 
deposits, currently 5.658 percent, or approximately $849, for 
a total of $15,849 ($15,000 plus $849). The City would also 
_y refund monies paid by Mr. Chui to the City to record the new 

deed and taxes he has paid on the property, plus interest of 
5.658 percent, for an estimated total of $1,323. In total, Mr. 
Chui would receive an estimated refund of $17,172 ($15,849 
plus $1,323) from the City. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

50 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 22, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



In addition, the owner of the property at 45 Crescent Street 
has agreed to pay all unpaid and current Property Taxes 
from 1990 to 1998 on the lot, which, according to the Tax 
Collector, totals $3,868. 

1. Both the Treasurer and Tax Collector advise that they 
have taken corrective action to ensure that this situation will 
not happen again. The Treasurer and Tax Collector report 
that once the subject matter was brought to their attention, 
they directed staff to review the sequence of events leading to 
this sale and report that, as a result of this review, they have 
directed their office to institute regular site visits to parcels 
of land which they are contemplating for sale at public 
auction; and to expand their title and description disclaimer 
notices to prospective bidders at the City's public auctions 
which place a portion of the responsibility on the buyer for 
ensuring that what has been advertised as being sold is 
actually what is sold. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 




"7 ./ 

tarvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

51 






.AGENDA 

Finance Committee 

.Board of Supervisors 

City and County of San Francisco 

REGULAR MEETING 



POHUMENTSDEPT. 

JUL 2 3 1998 

SSSffitf 



WEDNESDAY, JULY 29, 1998 - 1:00 P.M. 



VETERANS BUILDING 

401 VAN NESS AVE, RM. 410 

SAN FRANCISCO, CA. 94102 



MEMBERS: Supervisors Mabel Teng, Barbara Kaufman, Gavin Newsom 
CLERK: Joni Blanchard 



b. 



R 



k. 



ffi 



Disability Access 



Both the Committee Room (Room 410) and the Chamber (Room 404) are wheelchair 
accessible. The closest accessible BART Station is Civic Center, tour blocks from the 
Veterans Building. Accessible MUNI lines serving this location are: -=42 Downtown Loop 
and the -7 1 Haight/Nonega and the F line to Market and Van Ness and the METRO 
stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI 
accessible services, call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of the Veterans Building adjacent to Davies Hall 
and the War Memorial Complex. 

Assistive listening devices are available for use in the Meeting Room and the Board 
Chamber. A device can be borrowed prior to or during a meeting. Borrower identification is 
required and must be held by Room 308 staff. 



The following services are available on request 48 hours prior to the meeting or hearing: 

♦ For American sign language interpreters or the use of a reader during a meeting, contact 
Violeta Mosuela at (415) 554-7704. 

♦ For a large print copy of an agenda, contact Moe Vazquez at (415) 554-4909. 

In order to assist the City's efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, 
multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other 
attendees may be sensitive to various chemical based products. Please help the City to accommodate 
these individuals. 

Oovemment's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, 
boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County c:cist to conduct the people's business. The 
Sunshine Ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations 
are open to the people's review. For more information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance 
(Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code) or to report a violation of the ordinance, 
contact the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force at 554-4851. 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 98-0518 . [Affordable Child Care Program] Ordinance 
amending Planning Code Section 314.5 to expand the sources and 
eligible uses of monies in the Affordable Child Care Fund, to 
allow monies from that fund to be used to fund any report (s) 
required to demonstrate the relationship between office and 
hotel development projects and child care demand as described 
in described in San Francisco Planning Code Section 314.4 and 
to provide for Board of Supervisors approval of rule and 
regulations for the uses of that fund; companion measure to 
File 98-0519. (Supervisor Teng) 

(Planning Commission Resolution No. 14634 adopted 6/4/98; 
Certificate of Exemption from Environmental Review with general 
rule exclusion, Section 150619(b)(3) dated 5/13/98) 

ACTION: 



File 98-0519 . [Affordable Child Care Fund] Resolution 
approving regulations for the use of the Affordable Child Care 
Fund established by San Francisco Planning Code Section 314.5; 
superseding existing regulations for the use of the Affordable 
Child Care Fund; authorizing the use of the current unexpended 
balance of the Affordable Child Care Fund. (Supervisor Teng) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1188 . [Prop J Contract, Budget Analyst] Resolution 
concurring with the Controller's certification that Budget 
Analyst Services can be practically performed by private 
contractor for lower cost than similar work services performed 
by City and County employees. (Clerk of the Board) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1176 . [Settlement of Grievance, Fariba Mahmoudi] 
Ordinance authorizing settlement of the pay grievance of Fariba 
Mahmoudi filed pursuant to the Memorand of Understanding 
between the International Federation of Professional and 
Technical Engineers, Loca 21, AFL-CIO, and the City and County 
of San Francisco in the amount of Sixteen Thousand Eight 
Hundred Twenty-Six Dollars and Fifty Cents ($16,826.50). 
(Department of Human Resources) 

ACTION: 



File 98-1022 . [Property Lease - City of Santa Clara] 

Resolution authorizing an assignment, assumption and amendment 

of a 40-year lease of Public Utilities land located in the City 

of Santa Clara for parking and landscaping from Larvan 

Properties, Assignor, to MELP VII, Assignee. (Public Utilities 

Commission) 

(Consideration continued from 7/15/98) 

ACTION: 



6. File 98-1067 . [Outreach Newspapers] Resolution designating the 
Bay View, Inc. to be outreach newspaper of the City and County 
of San Francisco for the African-American community; 
designating the China Press to be outreach newspaper of the 
City and County of San Francisco for the Chinese Community; and 
designating the El Latino to be outreach newspaper of the City 
and County of San Francisco for the Hispanic community 

commencing , for outreach advertising. (Purchasing 

Department) 

(Consideration continued from 7/15/98) 

ACTION: 

7. File 98-1068 . [Outreach Newspaper] Resolution designating the 
San Francisco Bay Times for outreach advertising for the City 
and County of San Francisco for the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual 

Community beginning , and until such time that a 

periodical can be designated as the official outreach 
periodical for the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual community. (Purchasing 
Department) 

(Consideration continued from 7/15/98) 

ACTION: 



8. File 98-1145 . [Off -Street Parking Lease Agreement for DHS] 
Resolution authorizing the lease agreement for off-street 
parking at 205 - 13th Street for the Department of Human 
Services effective the later of August 1, 1998 or upon the date 
City receives 24-hour notice to vacate their current parking 
site. (Real Estate Department) 

ACTION: 

9. File 98-1157 . [Same Sex Domestic Violence Programs Fund] 
Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Part I of the Administrative 
Code by amending Section 62.9, requiring fees charged by the 
County Clerk to perform a ceremony solemnizing the formation of 
a domestic partnership to be deposited in the Same Sex Domestic 
Violence Programs Fund and by amending Chapter 8 by adding 
Section 8.40 establishing the Same Sex Domestic Violence 
Programs Fund. (Supervisor Kaufman, Ammiano) 

ACTION: 

10. File 98-1172 . [Budget Analyst - Performance Audits] Motion 
amending the agreement between the Budget Analyst and the Board 
of Supervisors to provide that the Budget Analyst will increase 
the level of services dedicated to Performance Auditing at a 
cost of $200,000 annually with initial funding provided in the 
adopted Fiscal Year 1998-1999 Budget. (Supervisor Kaufman) 

ACTION: 



11. File 98-1173 . [Audit Priorities] Motion adopting a proposed 
schedule of audits to be conducted of programs of City and 
County Departments; see File 98-1172. (Supervisor Kaufman) 



ACTION: 



12. File 98-1137 . [Housing Authority - Management Audit] Motion 

requesting that a management audit of the San Francisco Housing 
Authority be added to the audit workplan, be given priority on 
this workplan, and be conducted at the earliest juncture. 
(Supervisors Yee, Ammiano) 

ACTION: 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 

Rule 5.40 provides that when legislation is introduced which would 
create or revise major city policy, the committee to which the 
legislation is assigned shall not consider the legislation until at 
least 30 days after the date of introduction. 

File 98-1088. [Flea Market] Ordinance amending Administrative 
Code by adding Chapter 9B, Sections 9B.1 through 9B.9, authorizing 
the City Administrator to establish and regulate a flea market at 
100 Alemany Boulevard; charging vendors at the market a fee for the 
privilege of selling at the market; and ratifying and approving fees 
collected between June 1996 and the effective date of this 
ordinance. (Supervisor Newsom) , 30 Day Rule expires 7/29/98. 

File 98-1118. [Appropriation, Dept . of Animal Care & Control] 
] Ordinance appropriation $36,551, Dept. of Animal Care and Control, 
from the General Fund Reserve for salaries, fringe benefits and 
materials and supplies, and for the creation of one (1) position 
related to the care and treatment of horses, for fiscal year 
1998-99; companion measure to File 98-1119. RO #98004. (Supervisor 
Medina), 30 Day Rule expires 8/5/98. 

Watch future calendars for matters. 



Finance Committee 
S.F. Board of Supervisors 
401 Van Ness Ave., Room 308 
San Francisco, CA 94102 

IMPORTANT HEARING NOTICE! ! ! 



Public Library,Gov't Info. Ctr., 5 th Fir 
Attn: Susan Horn 



0-25 



i 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



FS 



^OARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANAIA r ST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



July 24, 1998 



Finance Committee > . a 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

Budget Analyst ^co^-e.M^/ -&- **<*; JUL 2 8 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 



TO: 

FROM: 

SUBJECT: July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Items 1 and 2 - Files 98-518 and 98-519 



Department: 



Item: 



Mayor's Office of Children Youth and Their Families 

(MOCYF) 

Department of City Planning 



File 98-518: 



Ordinance amending the City Planning 



Code by amending Section 314.5 to (1) expand the sources 
and eligible uses of monies in the Affordable Child Care 
Fund, (2) allow monies from the Fund to be used to fund anj r 
report required to demonstrate the relationship between 
office and hotel development projects and child care demand 
as described in Planning Code Section 314.4, (3) provide for 
Board of Supervisors approval of Rules and Regulations for 
the uses of the Affordable Child Care Fund, and (4) rename 
the Affordable Child Care Fund as the "Child Care Capital 
Fund" in order to reflect the amended uses. 

File 98-519: Resolution approving regulations for the 

use of the Affordable Child Care Fund established by City 
Planning Code Section 314.5; superceding existing 
regulations for the use of the Affordable Child Care Fund: 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998, Finance Committee Meeting 



and authorizing the use of the current unexpended balance of 
the Affordable Child Care Fund. 



Description: File 98-518 



Under the existing provisions of Section 314 of the City 
Planning Code, Section 314 establishes "Child-Care 
Requirements for Office and Hotel Development Projects," 
which provides that developers of office and hotel projects in 
excess of 50,000 new square feet are required to construct or 
provide a child-care facility on or near the site of a new or 
renovated development project, or pay an in-lieu fee to the 
City (assessed and collected by the Department of City 
Planning) of $1 per square foot of the office or hotel project, 
which shall be used to (1) reduce the cost of providing 
affordable child-care services to children from households of 
low income, and (2) increase the supply of child-care facilities 
affordable to households of low and moderate income. 

Section 314.5 of the City Planning Code presently authorizes 
the establishment of an Affordable Child Care (ACC) Fund, 
which is administered by the MOCYF, for the purpose of 
depositing the in lieu fees collected by the City. According to 
Mr. Harold Guetersloh of the Controller's Office, the balance 
in the Affordable Childcare Fund as of July 22, 1998 is 
$1,430,000. 

Presently, the sole funding source for the ACC Fund is the 
aforementioned fees from developers of new and renovated 
office and hotel buildings in the City. Expenditures from the 
ACC Fund are made solely for providing vouchers to low 
income families with children up to age three to subsidize 
child care costs, and the associated administrative costs. 
According to Ms. Amy Kershaw at MOCYF, providing 
vouchers for childcare to low income families, meets the 
requirements of the ACC Fund which stipulate that monies 
may be used to reduce the cost of providing affordable child- 
care services to children from households of low income 
families. 

The proposed ordinance would amend Section 314.5 by 
changing the name of the Affordable Child Care Fund and by 
expanding the eligible sources and uses of the Fund monies 
as follows: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Julv 29. 1998, Finance Committee Meeting 



1. Change the name of the Affordable Child Care Fund to 
the Child Care Capital Fund in order to reflect the new 
eligible use of Fund monies. 

2. Expand the authorized funding sources for the Child Care 
Capital Fund to include appropriations of General Fund 
monies and contributions from third parties designated for 
the Child Care Capital Fund, such as corporate or individual 
donations. 

3. Expand the authorized eligible uses for Child Care 
Capital Fund monies to also include expenditures "to 
improve" the quality of child care facilities (both family child 
care programs and private non-profit centers) which MOCYF 
interprets to mean providing funds for capital improvements, 
such as, for example, new flooring or lights, kitchen 
renovations, or the purchase of additional play structures. 
Authorizing expenditures for the improvement of child care 
facilities would be in addition to the existing eligible 
expenditures to increase the supply of childcare facilities for 
low and moderate income families. 

4. Authorize use of the Child Care Capital Fund monies by 
the Director of City Planning to fund any report required by 
State law to demonstrate the relationship between office and 
hotel development projects and increased demand for child 
care. See Comment No. 6. 

5. Simplify the procedures for approving the Program 
Regulations for administering the Child Care Capital Fund, 
established by the Director of City Planning pursuant to 
Section 314.5, by requiring only that such Rules and 
Regulations shall be subject to approval by resolution of the 
Board of Supervisors. Currently, the Director of City 
Planning is required to publish proposed Rules and 
Regulations in an official newspaper of general circulation 
and provide notice of a public meeting to be held on such 
Rules and Regulations. If this proposed ordinance is 
approved, the proposed Program Regulations would no longer 
be published in the City's Official newspaper and notices of 
public meetings would no longer be required. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998, Finance Committee Meeting 

File 98-519 

The proposed resolution would adopt new Program 
Regulations for the use of the Affordable Child Care Fund 
developed by the Mayor's Office of Children, Youth and Their 
Families, pursuant to a previously approved Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU) between the Director of City Planning 
and the Mayor's Office of Children, Youth and Their 
Families, which provides that the Mayor's Office has 
assumed responsibility for administration of the Child Care 
Capital Fund, including drafting regulations regarding the 
Fund. 

Approval of this proposed resolution would adopt the 
proposed Program Regulations (see Attachment 1 which 
contains the proposed Program Regulations and an 
explanation provided by MOCYF as to how such regulations 
differ from the existing Program Regulations) and replace 
the existing Program Regulations, which were approved by 
the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Resolution No. 659-95. 

As described above, the proposed Program Regulations would 
authorize monies in the Child Care Capital Fund to be 
provided directly to child care providers to finance certain 
costs designed to increase and/or improve existing child care 
facilities, in lieu of providing child care vouchers to low 
income families, except that MOCYF would be authorized to 
utilize a portion of the unexpended balance in the Affordable 
Child Care Fund to continue providing subsidies to families 
currently participating in the voucher program pursuant to 
the existing Regulations, until such time as those families 
are no longer eligible to receive assistance under the existing 
Regulations. 

The proposed Program Regulations would also change the 
existing Program Regulations by allowing sources other than 
the above described fees to developers to contribute to the 
Child Care Capital Fund, including appropriations of 
General Fund monies as approved by the Board of 
Supervisors, and contributions from private third parties. 

Comments: 1. Attachment 2, provided by MOCYF, is the expenditures 

totaling S278,326 for the MOCYF Fiscal Year December 1. 
1997 through November 30, 1998 from the Affordable Child 
Care Fund. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

4 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998, Finance Committee Meeting 



2. According to Ms. Kershaw, currently the Affordable Child 
Care Fund contains one-time fees charged to developers to 
subsidize ongoing costs of child care subsidies for low income 
families. Ms. Kershaw reports that using one-time fees to 
fund ongoing costs creates instability and uncertainty for 
participating families, management problems for 
administering agencies who are unable to plan as to how 
much monies will be available, and budgeting difficulties for 
MOCYF, since it is difficult to project the amount of fees that 
will be collected. Ms. Kershaw advises that the proposed 
changes in eligible funding sources and uses will result in the 
one-time developer fees being used to finance much needed 
one-time capital improvements to the City's stock of 
affordable childcare facilities, both family child care 
programs and private non-profit centers, which will build the 
supply of high quality child care available to low income 
families. 

3. Ms. Kershaw notes that MOCYF intends to contract with 
the Low Income Housing Fund, the nonprofit operator of the 
San Francisco Child Care Facilities Financing Fund, to 
administer the proposed Child Care Capital Fund (which is 
the proposed new name for the existing Affordable Child 
Care Fund). However, Ms. Kershaw reports that the 
proposed regulations are written broadly enough to allow the 
ACC Fund program to be operated by a City agency or 
another community-based organization in the future. 

The San Francisco Child Care Facilities Financing Fund 
(CCFF) is a public-private partnership with the goal of 
increasing the quantity and improving the quality of child 
care in San Francisco. CCFF was established in FY 1997-98 
with an appropriation of $200,000 in General Fund monies, 
along with $300,000 from the Miriam and Peter Haas Fund 
and $400,000 from Providian Financial Corporation. In FY 
1998-99, the Board of Supervisors appropriated $600,000 in 
General Fund monies to the CCFF, which now has an 
endowment in excess of $1.5 million. The CCFF offers grants, 
loans, and technical assistance to San Francisco child care 
providers. 

According to Ms. Kershaw, by contracting with the San 
Francisco Low Income Housing Fund to administer the 
proposed Child Care Capital Fund, there would be a cohesive 
program with centralized planning to provide funding for 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

5 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998, Finance Committee Meeting 



increasing child care facilities and monitoring and improving 
the quality of child care facilities. 

4. Ms. Kershaw reports that approval of these subject 
proposed changes to the Program Regulations would result in 
phasing out the existing voucher program, which subsidizes 
access to childcare, and replacing the voucher program with 
the above described capital improvement program. Ms. 
Kershaw notes that the current voucher program would be 
phased out without any adverse effect on the 37 families with 
children under three years of age who are currently 
participating because MOCYF plans to continue providing 
vouchers to the 37 participating families, until all children 
reach age three, at which time the children would no longer 
be eligible for assistance under the current program and the 
vouchers would be discontinued. MOCYF estimates the cost 
to continue providing vouchers to the 37 currently 
participating families until all children reach age three 
would cost approximately $521,154. 

5. According to Ms. Kershaw, whenever a City assesses a 
local fee, State law requires a nexus study that describes the 
relationship between the fee and the use of the funds 
collected. Such a nexus report is required by the State to 
demonstrate the relationship between the fee assessed on 
office and hotel developments and increased demand for child 
care. According to Ms. Kershaw, it is vital that funding be 
provided for such a report to enable the City to comply with 
State requirements. Ms. Kershaw notes that if this proposed 
ordinance is approved to allow the Affordable Child Care 
Fund monies to be used to fund a nexus study, the 
Department of City Planning plans to contract with a 
consulting firm to provide the nexus study, at an estimated 
cost of $20,000-$50,000. 

6. MOCYF proposes to allocate the remaining ACC Fund 
balance of $858,846 (the S 1.430.000 current balance less 
$521,154 for continued voucher program and less $50,000 for 
mandatory nexus study) to the above described Child Care 
Capital Fund, administered by the Low Income Housing 
Fund for use as grants or loans to child care providers for 
capital improvements to child care facilities. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998, Finance Committee Meeting 

7. Expenditures from the proposed Child Care Capital Fund 
would not be subject to appropriation approval of the Board 
of Supervisors. 

Recommendations: Approval of the proposed ordinance, File 98-518, and the 
proposed resolution, File 98-519, are policy matters for the 
Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Page I cr d 

Mayor's Office of Children. x^o^x Willie l Brown. Jr. 

Youth & Their Families X/^si^^X Mayor 




TO: Taylor Emerson. Board^ofStrpen isors. Budget Analyst 

FROM: Amy Kershaw. Fiscal Policy Analyst. Starting Points 

RE: Proposed Changes to the Affordable Child Care Fund 

Finance Committee, Wednesday. July 29. 1998, 1:00pm 
File numbers 98-518 and 98-519 

DATE: Julv 23. 1998 



The Affordable Child Care (ACC) Fund was established in 1985 to help meet the demand for child 
care associated with new building developments. The fund consists of contributions from 
developers of large office and hotel projects (over 50,000 square feet) who are required, as a 
condition of building approval, to build a child care facility or to pay into the ACC Fund. The 
Planning Department administers the ACC Fund. 

The Affordable Child Care (ACC) Program was established to disburse the funds collected by the 
ACC Fund. The program provides child care subsidies to low income families with children six 
months to three years of age. The ACC Program is administered, through an MOU with the 
Planning Department. By MOCYF. 

The ACC Program is not currently operating consistent with its legislative intent. While all of the 
families receiving assistance are low-income and in need of subsidized child care, the priorities 
established by the original program regulations are so restrictive that none of the participating 
families meet the highest priority category. In addition, because a nexus study was never completed 
for the ACC fund, it is also out of compliance with a new state law (AB 1600) which requires a 
nexus study for any locally imposed developer fees. 

Most importantly, the program has a much more fundamental flaw. It uses an unstable funding base 
-- one-time fees on developers— to fund on-going costs — child care subsidies for low income 
families. Regardless of our serious shortage of child care subsidies, paying for subsidies through 
one-time developer fees is not good policy: the funds are erratic - creating uncertainty for families 
and administering agencies. 

The proposed Child Care Capital Program is a child care facilities financing program. This new 
program will provide loans and grants to child care programs to make capital improvements. 
Eligible use of funds include, major and minor renovations, improvements to outdoor play spaces 
and projects to increase access for disabled children. In order to qualify for funding through this 
program, providers must have nonprofit status and serve low-income children. The new program 
will be managed by the Low Income Housing Fund (LIHF), a nonprofit fiscal intermediary with 14 
years of experience in community lending (please see attached program description). 

FOX PLAZA ♦ 1390 MARKET STREET ♦ SUITE 918 ♦ SAN FRANCISCO ♦ CA941C2 
415/554-8990 PHONE ♦ 415/554-8965 FAX 



Attachment 1 
Page 2 of 5 



PROGRAM REGULATIONS FOR THE CHILD CARE CAPITAL FUND 
FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
(formerly known as the Affordable Child Care Fund ) 

The following regulations govern expenditures of monies held in the Child Care Capital Fund 
("Fund") (formerly known as the Affordable Child Care Fund) established by San Francisco 
Planning Code Section 314.5. These regulations replace the "Final Regulations for Affordable 
Child Care Fund" approved by the Board of Supervisors in September, 1992. 

The Fund is made up of contributions from developers of large office and hotel projects who are 
required by Section 314.4 of the San Francisco Planning Code, as a condition of approval of 
building or site permit application, to provide a child care facility or to pay an in-lieu fee to the 
City. These regulations also govern other contributions made to the Fund (e.g., general fund 
contributions, private donations). The revenues held in the Fund must be used to foster the 
expansion and/or improvement of child care facilities accessible to low and moderate income 
families. The Fund is administered by the Mayor's Office of Children, Youth and Their Families 
("MOCYF") pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding between MOCYF and the 
Department of City Planning. 

Any outside contributions made to the Fund can be made directly to MOCYF and do not need to 
be deposited with The City Department of Planning. 

These regulations describe a child care facilities financing program to be administered by 
MOCYF. MOCYF may choose to operate this Program directly or contract with a non-profit 
fiscal intermediary to manage the day-to-day operations of the Program. These regulations will 
be effective upon adoption by resolution of the Board of Supervisors as specified in Section 
314.5 of the San Francisco Planning Code. These regulations require MOCYF to evaluate the 
Program every six months for the first year of the program and annually after that. In addition 
MOCYF may, at any time, suggest amendments to these regulations necessary to improve the 
program. 

I. General Program Description 

The Child Care Capital Program (CCCP) is a child care facilities financing program designed to 
improve the quality of and access to child care in San Francisco by providing no- or low-cost 
financing opportunities to child care providers in order to meet one time capital expenditures. 
Financing provided through the Program will increase (i.e, number of children who can be 
served) licensed capacity; maintain licensed capacity; and'or provide quality enhancements. 
Through different strategies, the Program will provide financing assistance for both family child 
care providers and non-profit child care centers. Within these categories, MOCYF will work 
with the contractor described below to determine eligible uses which maximize the use of 
CCCP funds and respond to the changing needs of child care providers. 



ACC regulations p. 1 

Mayor's Office of Children, Youth and Then Families 
7/23/98 9 



Fage 3 of 5 



CCCP funds may be used for one or all of the following: 

Family Child Care Assistance. CCCP funds may be used to provide family child care 
providers with small grants or loans for one-time capital costs to increase and/or maintain 
child care capacity; and/or to improve the quality of services being provided. Eligible 
uses of grant or loan funds include modification to facility to provide access or services to 
disabled children, renovations to plumbing, electrical systems, kitchen, bathrooms, health 
and safety equipment, playground equipment. 

Child Care Center Assistance. Financing assistance for child care centers, primarily 
serving low income children, will be made available for the purposes of improvements in 
the quality, safety and environment in center based child care and to assist with the 
development, expansion or repair of facilities. CCCP funds may be used to provide direct 
loans and possibly grants, provide subsidies for interest rate write downs, and/or 
potentially provide loan guarantees to leverage additional funds from conventional 
lenders. 

Technical Assistance. Technical assistance will also be made available for child care 
providers qualifying for assistance under the Program. Technical assistance may include 
business planning, helping a child care provider fill out a loan application, apply for 
additional loans or grants, create budget projections or plan program expansions. 
Individual technical assistance needs will be assessed at the time of application to the 
Program by the Contractor. 

II. Eligibility 

To be eligible for assistance from the CCCP, both family child care and center-based providers 
must, at a minimum: 

• Be located in the City and County of San Francisco; 

• Possess a valid operating license for child care services or be in the process of applying 
for an operating license: and 

• Demonstrate the viability of the day care operation for the term of the financial 
assistance being requested. 

Child care centers seeking assistance must also be primarily serving children from low income 
families. Prior to receiving any assistance under the provisions of this Program, all providers 
will submit certification that they meet the eligibility requirements of the Program. 



ACC regulations p. 2 

Mayor's Office of Children, Youth and Their Families 
7/23/98 10 



Attachment 1 
Page 4 ol 5~ 



IV. Program Administration 

The CCCP will continue to be administered by MOCYF. However, MOCYF will contract with 
a non-profit fiscal intermediary ("Contractor") to manage the day-to-day operations of the 
Program. The Contractor must have experience in non-profit lending and grant administration, 
and administering programs for public agencies. In addition, MOCYF may choose to administer 
all or a portion of the Fund itself, or to contract with other entities, as determined by MOCYP, in 
order to most effectively administer the Fund and maximize the use of monies in the Fund. All 
such contracts will be subject to compliance with applicable City contracting requirements. 

MOCYF will continue to receive administrative costs from the Fund to cover its oversight of the 
Fund. Those administrative costs will be equal to Ten Thousand Dollars (SI 0,000.00) per year, 
to be increased annually based on the percentage change in the cost of living increase for the San 
Francisco area. In addition, MOCYF may use a portion of the Fund to pay reasonable 
administrative costs (not to exceed 15% of the total contract amount) charged by any entity, 
including the Contractor, which administers the Fund on MOCYF's behalf. 

IV. Program Administrator Duties 

The duties of the Program Administrator (MOCYF or the Contractor chosen to manage the 
Program) shall be as follows: 

1. Creating specific program guidelines, including caps on permissible loan/ grant 
amounts and priorities for loan/grant recipients' (e.g., provider income, income of 
families served and neighborhood location of provider); 

2. Outreach to potential loan/grant recipients; 

3. Information and marketing of the loan/grant program; 

4. Creating and disseminating application materials; 

5. Communication with child care providers, both in the application phase and 
through the term of any loan/grant; 

6. Determining eligibility of fund recipients; 

7. Analyzing grant and loan requests; 

8. Grant and loan administration; 

9. Monitoring providers for continued compliance with loan/grant requirements, and 
taking any steps necessary to recover funds from noncomplying recipients; 

10. Providing technical assistance to child care providers; 

1 1 . Providing interim reports to the City, the Child Care Planning and Advisory 
Council (CCPAC), providers and other community groups; 

12. Raising additional funds to support the Program. 



' These priorities shall be consistent with stated City policies and established Children's Services Fund funding 
priorities. 

ACC regulations p. 3 

Mayor's Office of Children, Youth and Their Families 

7/23/98 1 1 



Attachment 1 
Page b of 5 



The Contractor may subcontract with other nonprofit agencies for limited portions of the work 
associated with the day to day operations of the Program (e.g., the provision of business oriented 
technical assistance to child care providers). 

VI. Evaluation and Mayor's Office Report 

After the new Program regulations have been in effect for six months, the Mayor's Office of 
Children Youth and Families will draft a report to the Board of Supervisors that: 1 ) evaluates the 
performance of the program, including the performance of the Contractor; 2) includes 
demographic analysis of the child care providers assisted by the program and the San Francisco 
families they serve; 3) summarizes the Program's performance and impact; and 4) suggests 
changes in the program. 



ACC regulations p. 4 

Mayor's Office of Children. Youth and Their Families 

7/23/98 12 



ui_i^z.i-o cuunl.il ■+ ti^atyoD 



NO. 393 
Attachment 2 



P03 



Children's Council of San Francisco 
Affordable Child Care 

1997-1998 

December 1, 1997 to November 30. 1998 



Total 





Personnel 










G. Storan 


Payments Manager 537,742.00 




7.50% 


$2,831.00 


Y. Gaines 


Program Specialist 24,877.00 




50.00% 


12,439.00 


t 


E. Lam 


Accounting Clerk 24,4-77.00 




20.00% 


4.895.00 


X. 


Total salaries 




77.50% 


20.165.00 




Mandatory Fringe 


RCA 






7.65% 


1,543.00 


HEALTH 






10.21% 


2,059.00 


SUI 






0.80% 


161.00 


W.C 






1.34% 


270.00 




Ffex Plan 


($840 X FTE • if qualified) 




3.23% 


651.00 


3. 


Total Fringes 




23.23% 


4,684.00 




Pro^ssiohal-?. ■■ | 




Child Care Payments 






109.884.00 


C. 


Total Professional 






109,884.00 




Other Contracts 


■ 


Wu Yee 


(see attached Budget) 




131,814.00 


D. 


Total Other Contracts 




131,814.00 




Other Services 




Office supplies 








1. 900.00 


Printing 










Rent / Utilities 








3,200.00 


Travel 










Conference 










Telephone 
Postage 








1.275.00 








750.00 




Insurance (Bonding) 








647.00 


E. 


Total Other Services 




7,772.00 




Administrative Costs 




J.Uselman 


Assistant Controller 35,136.00 


63.00 


7.50% 


2,635.00 




Sub-Total Admin. Salaries 




7.50% 


2,635.00 


RCA 






7.65% 


202.00 


HEALTH 






10.21% 


269.00 


SUI 






0.80% 


21.00 


W.C. 






1.34% 


35.00 


Flex Plan 


($840 X FTE - if qualified) 




0.19% 


5.00 




Sub-Total Admin. Fringes 




20.19% 


532.00 




Agency Wide Audit 








840.00 




Total Administrative Costs 




4.007.00 








TOTAL 




S278.326 00J 






••••'. Admin 


and Support 




S36.628 00 ] 



13 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 4 - File 98-1176 

Department: Department of Human Resources (DHR) 

Department of Transportation 

Item: Ordinance authorizing the settlement of a pay grievance 

of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi filed against the City pursuant 
to the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21. AFL-CIO, in the amount of 
S16.826.50. 

Description: The proposed ordinance would approve a settlement 

against the City m the amount of S16.826.50 for a 
grievance filed on behalf of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi by the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21. 

According to Mr. Geoffrey Rothman, of DHR, Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired by the Department of 
Transportation as a 5202 Junior Civil Engineer at Step 1 
on March 29, 1994 and worked at Step 1 for the period 
March 29, 1994 through November 17, 1995. According to 
Mr. Rothman, as stated in his attached memorandum of 
July 22, 1998, "At the time of her [Ms. Mahmoudi] offer of 
employment she was informed that she could be 
appointed above the entrance rate of step 1 if she 
provided records documenting that she would experience 
a loss of compensation if she was appointed at step 1. Ms. 
Mahmoudi submitted the required documentation to the 
Department of Transportation to justify an appointment 
to step 5. No action was initiated by the department to 
request approval of the step 5 appointment." 

The annual salary at Step 5 of a 5202 Junior Civil 
Engineer position as of March 29, 1994 when Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired was $44,970 or $7,882 higher than 
the annual salary of $37,088 at Step 1. On November 18, 
1995, Ms. Mahmoudi was promoted to classification 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer at step 3 and worked at step 3 
for the period November 18, 1995 through August 11, 
1997. If her promotion to the 5204 Assistant Civil 
Engineer position had been based on step 5 of a 5202 
Junior Civil Engineer position, Ms. Mahmoudi would 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



have been promoted to step 4 of the 5204 Assistant Civil 
Engineer position instead of to step 3 of the 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer position. As of November 18, 
1995, the date of her promotion, the annual salary at step 
4 of a 5204 Assistant Civil Engineer position was $48,598 
or $2,766 higher than the S45,832 annual salary at the 
step 3 salary which Ms. Mahmoudi received. 

Article III.3.G-Appointment Above Entrance Rate of the 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21 states that, "Appointments may be 
made by an appointing officer at any Step in the 
compensation schedule upon the approval of the Human 
Resources Director under one or more of the following 
conditions: a) A former permanent City employee, 
following resignation with service satisfactory, is being 
reappointed to a permanent position in his/her former 
classification, b) loss of compensation would result if 
appointee accepts position at the normal Step, c) a severe, 
easily demonstrated and documented recruiting and 
retention problem exists, d) the appointee possessed 
special experience, qualifications, and/or skills including, 
but not limited to. the number of years performing similar 
work elsewhere which, m the Appointing Officer's opinion, 
warrants appointment above the entrance rate, e) to be 
considered, requests for adjustments under the provisions 
of this Section must be received in the offices of the 
Department of Human Resources not later than the end of 
the fiscal year in which the appointment is made, and 
when the Human Resources Director approves 
appointments of all new hires in a classification at a Step 
above the entrance rate, the Human R.esource Director 
may advance to that Step incumbents in the same 
classification who are below that Step.' - 

On behalf of Ms. Mahmoudi, Local 21, AFL-CIO filed a 
grievance against the City in July, 1996 asserting 
violation of Article III. 3. G- Appointment Above Entrance 
Rate of the MOU. 

In his July 22, 1998 memorandum, Mr. Rothman stated 
"Ms. Mahmoudi inquired regarding the status of the 
request (to be appointed at a higher step when she was 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



first hired by the Department of Transportation) shortly 
after she was hired and was provided with inaccurate 
information by a former supervisor that resulted in her 
belief that an adjustment to her salary step was no longer 
possible. However, Ms. Mahmoudi raised the issue again 
a year later when she became aware that two new hires in 
the 5202 class were advised that they could be eligible for 
an appointment above the entrance rate. As a 
consequence, Ms. Mahmoudi inquired as to the 
misinformation given to her and again requested her 
appointment retroactively to the higher step. The 
Department then submitted a request to the Department 
of Human Resources, now two years later, for the step 5 
appointment." 

However, Mr. Rothman stated in his memorandum, 
"Requests for appointment above the entrance rate in 
order to be considered must be received either prior to 
appointment or at least within the same fiscal year of 
appointment. Therefore, the request was untimely and 
was denied by the Department of Human Resources." 

However, at this time the Department of Human Services 
is recommending approval of this subject settlement to 
grant Ms. Mahmoudi a settlement of $16,826.50 because, 
as Mr. Rothman states in his memorandum, "In view of 
the facts and circumstances provided by Ms. Mahmoudi 
and by the union, the Department of Human Resources is 
recommending approval of this settlement." 

1. The Budget Analyst has found that the original 
calculation of $16,826.50. as determined by the 
Department of Transportation, is in error and that the 
correct amount is S13,936.79. The Department of Human 
Resources and the Department of Transportation are in 
agreement. 

2. Ms. Vicki Clayton of the City Attorney's Office advises 
that if the Board of Supervisors does not approve the 
proposed ordinance, the dispute, would be decided by an 
arbitrator. 



Recommendation: 



1. Amend the proposed ordinance to authorize the correct 
amount of pay of $13,936.79 instead of $16,826.50. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

16 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. Approval of the proposed ordinance, as amended, is a 
policy decision for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



:ity and County of San Francisco fiVfe Department of Human Resources 




AKDREA R. GOURDINE 

July 22, 1998 -<i_^y human resources direct dr 

To: Harvey Rose 

Board of Supervisors' 3udge: Analyst 

W / 
From: Geoffrey Rothman I* *'/f 

employee Re:anoras Director 

Re: Fariba Mahmoudi Settlement 
File No. 98-1176 

Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi was hired as a class 5202 Jr. Civil Engineer on March 29, 1994. 

At the tune of her offer of employment she was informed that she could be appointed 
above the entrance rate of step 1 if she provided records documenting that she would 
experience a loss of compensation if she was appointed at step 1. Ms. Mahmoudi 
submitted the required documentation to the Department of Transportation to justify an 
appointment to step 5. No action was initiated by the department to request approval of 
the step 5 appointment. 

Ms. Mahmoudi inquired regarding the status of the request shortly after she was hired 
and was provided with inaccurate information by a former supervisor that resulted in he: 
belief that an adjustment to her salary step was no longer possible. 

However, Ms. Mahmoudi raised the issue again a year later when she became aware that 
two new hires into the 5202 class were advised that they could be eligible for an 
appointment above the entrance rate. 

As a consequence, Ms. Mahmoudi incuired as to the misinformation giver, to her and 
again requested he: appointment retroactive'.;.- to the higher step. 

The Department then submitted a request to the Department of Human Resources, now 
two years later, for the step 5 appointment. 

Requests for appointment above the entrance rate in order to be considered must be 
received either prior to aDooinrment or at least within the same fiscal year of 
appointment. Therefore, the recuest was untimely and was denied by the Department of 
Human Resources. 

IFFTE, Local 21 then fiied a grievance on behalf of Ms. Mahmoudi with the Department 
of Human Resources. 

In view of the facts and circumstances provided by Ms. Mahmoudi and by the 'anion, the 

Department of Human Resources is recommending approval of this settlement. 



*J. Gough Strut • San Frsnciico, CA M103-'! 



18 



CllMENTS DEPT. 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 5 -File 98-1022 



R E V 1 S t D J uly zv, i^o 

— " — nnriJMEN l ^ L* cr ' • 

Public Library, Gotrrihformation Ctr.. 5 th Fir 

Attj#fSi85ffi;2jGj#i, Dept. 41 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
15, 1998. 



Department: 



Item: 



Location: 

Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

Lessee: 

No. of Sq. Ft. and 
Cost Per Month: 



Annual Cost: 



Utilities and Janitor 
Provided by Lessee: 



Term of Lease: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Resolution authorizing an assignment, assumption and 
amendments, including a rent increase, pertaining to an 
existing 40-year lease of Public Utilities Commission land 
located in the City of Santa Clara for parking and 
landscaping from Larvan Properties, assignor, to MELP 
VII, assignee. 

A portion of Parcel 144 of Bay Division Pipeline Nos. 3 
and 4 right of way, in Santa Clara, California. 

To provide space for parking and landscaping to the 
assignee, MELP VII. 

City and County of San Francisco 

Larvan Properties 



The leased parcel is 0.346 acres, or approximately 15,072 
square feet at a current rate of $175.50 per month, or 
approximately $0.0116 per square foot. The proposed 
resolution would amend the lease to increase the monthly 
lease rate to $1,446.92 per month, or $0,096 per square 
foot, an increase of $0.0844 per square foot, or 728 
percent. 

The current annual lease rate is $2,105.92. The proposed 
resolution would amend the lease to increase the annual 
lease rate to $17,363, an increase of $15,257. 



The services to the subject land are currently provided by 
the lessee, Larvan Properties. The subject resolution 
would authorize Larvan Properties to assign the lease to 
MELP VII, who would then be responsible for providing 
all services to the subject land. 

August 1, 1977 through July 31, 2017, 40 years. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Right of Renewal: 
Description: 



Comments: 



No 

The City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through the Public Utilities Commission, currently leases 
approximately 0.346 acres of land to Larvan Properties, a 
General Partnership, pursuant to a 40 year ground lease. 
The subject land is used for parking and landscaping 
purposes. The tenant, Larvan Properties, has recently 
sold adjacent property to MELP VII, L.P., a California 
limited partnership and has requested consent to 
Assignment of the lease to MELP VII, L.P. (Assignee). 
The subject land would continue to be used for parking 
and landscaping purposes. 

The current lease provides that the base rental will be 
increased or decreased every five years in accordance with 
any increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index 
(CPI). Larvan, as the Assignor, has agreed to 
amendments to the lease, including: (1) an increase in 
the monthly rental rate to reflect fair market value from 
$175.50 per month to $1,446.92 per month (from 
$2,105.92 to $17,363 per year) with annual adjustments 
based on any increase of the CPI, (2) a reappraisal of the 
rent in nine years with an increase based on fair market 
value fur the land, (3) compliance with the City's Equal 
Benefits Ordinance requirements, and (4) compliance 
with the City's Pesticide Ordinance: provided, however, 
the PUC will consent to not unreasonably withhold any 
future assignments or subletting. 

1. Following the PUC's approval, but prior to Board of 
Supervisors approval, of this proposed lease assignment, 
of the subject City-owned land to MELP VII. Mr. Dowd 
states that. The assignee MELP MI closed escrow on the 
adjacent land and building, and inherited an existing 
lease, with a nine year term remaining, on the adjacent 
land and building. MELP MI will not agree to a rent 
reappraisal every five years because the} - have certain 
fixed costs that cannot be passed on to the existing tenant 
and they negotiated the assignment with the PUC and 
negotiated the purchase of the adjacent land and building 
based on fixed costs, including the rental rate for the 
subject City-owned land. According to MELP MI, any 
further rent adjustments prior to the existing lease 
expiration could place MELP MI in a financially 

BOARD OF SUPERMSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

compromised position." Therefore, Mr. Dowd states that 
he was unable to negotiate a rent reappraisal every five 
years as was suggested by the Finance Committee. 

2. However, in direct response to inquiries made by the 
Finance Committee at its meeting of July 15, 1998, the 
PUC was able to negotiate a new provision in this 
proposed lease which provides for one rent reappraisal in 
nine years, effective in the year 2007, that would be based 
on fair market value. However the rent on the lease would 
remain at the same rate for the last ten years of the lease 
from 2007 through 2017, except for the annual CPI 
adjustment. 

3. The assignment, assumption, and amendment to the 
subject lease became effective on March 13, 1998. As 
such, the proposed resolution should be amended for 
retroactivity. 

4. According to Mr. Gary Dowd of the PUC, the original 
lease rate for the subject property, established in 1977, 
was $756 per year, with adjustments every five years 
based on the CPI, which have brought the lease rate to 
the current $2,105.92 per year. Mr. Dowd reports that 
over the years, the base rent has not reflected fair market 
value. However, the lessee has agreed to the new rent 
with annual CPI increases and a reappraisal of the rent 
in nine years, provided the lease is amended to include 
the statement, "Landlord's consent will not be 
unreasonably withheld in any instance where such 
consent is required to a proposed assignment, subletting, 
or other transfer of encumbrance of Tenant's interest in 
the lease." Mr. Dowd reports that such an amendment is 
acceptable to the PUC given the fact that the lease has 
been brought up to fair market value and the annual CPI 
adjustments and rent reappraisal in nine years should 
keep the lease rate at a fair market value level. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to provide for 

retroactivity. 

2. Approval of the proposed resolution, as amended, is a 
policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 5 - File 98-1022 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
15, 1998. 



Department: 



Item: 



Location: 



Purpose of Lease: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Resolution authorizing an assignment, assumption and 
amendments, including a rent increase, pertaining to an 
existing 40-year lease of Public Utilities Commission land 
located in the City of Santa Clara for parking and 
landscaping from Larvan Properties, assignor, to MELP 
VII, assignee. 

A portion of Parcel 144 of Bay Division Pipeline Nos. 3 
and 4 right of way, in Santa Clara, California. 

To provide space for parking and landscaping to the 
assignee, MELP VII. 



Lessor: 



Citv and Countv of San Francisco 



Lessee: 

No. of Sq. Ft. and 
Cost Per Month: 



Annual Cost: 



Larvan Properties 



The leased parcel is 0.346 acres, or approximately 15,072 
square feet at a current rate of $175.50 per month, or 
approximately $0.0116 per square foot. The proposed 
resolution would amend the lease to increase the monthly 
lease rate to $1,446.92 per month, or $0,096 per square 
foot, an increase of $0.0844 per square foot, or 728 
percent. 

The current annual lease rate is $2,105.92. The proposed 
resolution would amend the lease to increase the annual 
lease rate to $17,363, an increase of $15,257. 



Utilities and Janitor 
Provided by Lessee: 



Term of Lease: 



The services to the subject land are currently provided by 
the lessee, Larvan Properties. The subject resolution 
would authorize Larvan Properties to assign the lease to 
MELP VII, who would then be responsible for providing 
all services to the subject land. 

August 1, 1977 through July 31, 2017, 40 years. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Right of Renewal: 
Description: 



Comments: 



No 

The City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through the Public Utilities Commission, currently leases 
approximately 0.346 acres of land to Larvan Properties, a 
General Partnership, pursuant to a 40 year ground lease. 
The subject land is used for parking and landscaping 
purposes. The tenant, Larvan Properties, has recently 
sold adjacent property to MELP MI, L.P., a California 
limited partnership and has requested consent to 
Assignment of the lease to MELP VII, L.P. (Assignee). 
The subject land would continue to be used for parking 
and landscaping purposes. 

The current lease provides that the base rental will be 
increased or decreased every five years in accordance with 
any increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index 
(CPI). Larvan, as the Assignor, has agreed to 
amendments to the lease, including: (1) an increase in 
the monthly rental rate to reflect fair market value from 
$175.50 per month to SI, 446. 92 per month (from 
Sii. 105.92 to $17,363 per year) with annual adjustments 
based on any increase of the CPI, (2) a reappraisal of the 
rent in nine years with an increase based on fair market 
value for the land, (3) compliance with the City's Equal 
Benefits Ordinance requirements, and (4) compliance 
with the City's Pesticide Ordinance: provided, however, 
the PLC will consent to not unreasonably withhold any 
future assignments or subletting. 

1. Following the PUC's approval of this proposed lease 
assignment, Mr. Gary Dowd of the PUC states that, "The 
assignee, MELP MI, closed escrow on the adjacent land, 
then leased the property to another party." This action 
was taken prior to approval of the proposed assignment to 
MELP MI by the Board of Supervisors. Therefore, Mr. 
Dowd states that he was unable to negotiate a rent 
reappraisal every five years as was suggested by the 
Finance Committee. 

2. However, in direct response to inquiries made by the 
Finance Committee at its meeting of July 15, 1998, the 
PUC was able to negotiate a new provision in this 
proposed lease which provides for one rent reappraisal in 
nine years, effective in the year 2007, that would be based 

BOARD OF SUPERMSORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

on fair market value. However the rent on the lease would 
remain at the same rate for the last ten years of the lease 
from 2007 through 2017, except for the annual CPI 
adjustment. 

3. The assignment, assumption, and amendment to the 
subject lease became effective on March 13, 1998. As 
such, the proposed resolution should be amended for 
retroactivity. 

4. According to Mr. Gary Dowd of the PUC, the original 
lease rate for the subject property, established in 1977, 
was $756 per year, with adjustments every five years 
based on the CPI, which have brought the lease rate to 
the current $2,105.92 per year. Mr. Dowd reports that 
over the years, the base rent has not reflected fair market 
value. However, the lessee has agreed to the new rent 
with annual CPI increases and a reappraisal of the rent 
in nine years, provided the lease is amended to include 
the statement, "Landlord's consent will not be 
unreasonably withheld in any instance where such 
consent is required to a proposed assignment, subletting, 
or other transfer of encumbrance of Tenant's interest in 
the lease." Mr. Dowd reports that such an amendment is 
acceptable to the PUC given the fact that the lease has 
been brought up to fair market value and the annual CPI 
adjustments and rent reappraisal in nine years should 
keep the lease rate at a fair market value level. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution to provide for 

retroactivhw. 

2. Approval of the proposed resolution, as amended, is a 
policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Items 6 and 7 - Files 96-1067 and 98-106S 

Note: These items were continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of 
July 15, 1998. 

Department: Purchasing Department 

Item: File 98-1067 : Resolution designating for outreach 

advertising, the Bay View Inc. to be the outreach 
newspaper of the City for the African -American 
community; designating the China Press to be the 
outreach newspaper of the City for the Chinese 
community; and designating the El Latino to be the 
outreach newspaper of the City for the Hispanic 
community. 

File 98-1068 : Resolution designating the San Francisco 
Bay Times for outreach advertising for the City for the 
Lesbian/ Gay/ Bisexual community until such time that a 
periodical can be designated as the official outreach 
periodical for the Lesbian/ Gay/ Bisexual Community. 

Description: Proposition J, which was approved by the San Francisco 

electorate in November of 1994, provided, in part, for an 
Outreach Advertising Fund to be established for the 
purpose of the City placing "outreach advertising" or 
weekly notices of items pertaining to governmental 
operations in periodicals selected to reflect the diversity m 
race and sexual orientation of the population of the City. 
Outreach advertisements include, but are not limited to, 
information about issues that are being reviewed by the 
Board of Supervisors and directly affecting the public. 
Proposition J requires the City to withhold 10 percent of 
the amounts paid for official advertising and deposit the 
monies in the Outreach Advertising Revenue Fund. 

The Purchasing Department advises that pursuant to 
Proposition J, the Department issued an Invitation for 
Bids on May 9, 1998 for the City's outreach advertising. 
The issuance of the Invitation for Bids is in accordance 
with Section 2.80 of the Administrative Code, which finds 
that the City wishes to (1) maximize the public's access to 
public notices which are required to be published by law 
and (2) implement an aggressive outreach plan to meet 
the public information needs of those communities and 
neighborhoods which may not be adequately served by the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



City's other designated newspapers for official 
advertising. 

File 98-1067: The Purchasing Department received 

five bids in response to its Invitation for Bids including: 
(1) three bids for outreach advertising in the African 
American community. (2) one bid for outreach advertising 
in the Chinese community, and (3) one bid for outreach 
advertising in the Hispanic community. The Attachment 
provided by the Purchasing Department lists the bidders 
and the amounts bid. The "Cost of Sample" for the bid is 
the average cost to typeset a sample, calculated by 
dividing the total cost for the 4x6 inch block by the 
number of times the bidder is able to typeset the sample 
in the 4x6 inch block, using the bidder's choice of type font 
and column width. The cost of the 4x6 inch block is the 
number of lines in the block multiplied by the billing rate 
per line. 

The five bids were evaluated by the Purchasing 
Department on the basis of certain criteria and a point 
system established under Section 2.81-3 of the 
Administrative Code. Bidders were required to submit 
typeset samples and other documentation for evaluation 
purposes. The criteria used for evaluation of bids under 
Section 2.81-3 includes: (1) the advertising bid amount 
(the periodical which submits the lowest bid receives 
additional points), (2) the periodical's level of circulation 
(for each community, the peribdical with the largest 
circulation receives additional points), (3) the cost of the 
periodical (any periodical with a majority of circulation 
that is free of charge to the general public receives 
additional points), (4) the ownership of the periodical (any 
periodical which is owned by a local, minority, or women- 
owned firm receives additional points), and (5) the foreign 
language content of the periodical (a periodical with a 
majority of its editorial content published in the native 
language of the outreach community it serves receives 
additional points). 

Based on the point system established in Section 2.81-3, 
the Purchasing Department is recommending that the 
Bay View Inc., the China Press, and the El Latino be 
awarded contracts for the City's outreach advertising, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

based on receiving the highest point totals. The 
Attachment provided by the Purchasing Department 
contains the point evaluation data of the bidders. 

File 98-1068: According to the Purchasing 

Department no bids were received for an official outreach 
newspaper for the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual community. 
Because no bids were received, the Purchasing 
Department is not making a recommendation regarding 
the award of the City's Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual outreach 
advertising for FY 1998-99. Instead, the proposed 
resolution extends the current designation of the San 
Francisco Bay Times for advertising until such time that 
an official outreach periodical is selected. 

Comments: 1. Pursuant to Proposition J and in accordance with 

Section 2.81-2(a), the City is required to withhold 10 
percent of the annual amounts paid for the City's Type 1 
and Type 2 official advertising and to deposit these 
monies into the Outreach Advertising Fund. Type 1 
official advertising is published on two or more 
consecutive days to advertise special meetings of the 
Board of Supervisors. Type 2 official advertising is 
published for a single day or non-consecutive days to 
advertise notices of committee meetings of the Board of 
Supervisors, Invitation for Bids, Request for Proposals, 
and citations. The Purchasing Department estimates 
that the FY 1998-99 cost for the City's Type 1 and Type 2 
official advertising will be $837,100. Therefore, the 
estimated amount available for outreach advertising is 
$83,710, or 10 percent of the $837,100. 

2. The Purchasing Department states that the City 
Attorney has advised that the Board of Supervisors need 
not accept the Purchasing Department's 

recommendations to award contracts to the above-noted 
periodicals and may designate any periodical which is 
qualified under the Administrative Code. Additionally, 
pursuant to Sections 2.80-1 (b) and 2.81-4, the Board of 
Supervisors may specify additional outreach communities, 
and may authorize additional advertising for communities 
not adequately served by the City's official advertising 
and outreach periodicals. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

3. According to Mr. Edwin Lee, Director of Purchasing, 
there is a balance of approximately Si 75, 100 in the 
Outreach Advertising Fund as of June 24, 1998. 

4. Due to the unusual low number of bids received, the 
Purchasing Department has contacted additional 
newspapers that have expressed interest in the City's 
outreach advertising. Based on their responses, the 
Purchasing Department is now recommending that an 
additional eight newspapers, for a total of 11 newspapers, 
be awarded contracts for the City's outreach advertising. 
These eight additional newspapers are: Sun Reporter, 
Sing Tao Daily News, World Journal, Hokubei Mainuchi, 
Korean Times, Philippine Guardian, Small Business 
Exchange, El Reporter O-The Reporter. Therefore, the 
proposed resolution (File 98-1067) should be amended to 
designate these eight additional newspapers for the City's 
outreach advertising. 

5. In addition to extending the current designation of the 
San Francisco Bay Times, the Purchasing Department is 
now recommending that the City also contract with the 
biweekly publication, the Bay Area Reporter, for outreach 
advertising to the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual community. 
Therefore, Mr. Lee advises that the proposed resolution 
(File 98-1068) should be amended to designate the San 
Francisco Bay Times and Bay Area Reporter as the City's 
official outreach periodicals for the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual 
community. 

Recommendations: 1. Amend the proposed resolution (File 98-1067) to 

designate the following eight publications as additional 
outreach newspapers of the City: Sun Reporter, Sing Tao 
Daily News, World Journal, Hokubei Mainuchi, Korean 
Times, Philippine Guardian, Small Business Exchange, 
and El Reporter O-The Reporter. 

2. Amend the proposed resolution (File 98-1068) to 
designate the San Francisco Bay Times and Bay Area 
Reporter as the City's official outreach periodicals for the 
Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual community and to delete the 
language "until such time that a periodical can be 
designated as the official outreach periodical for the 
Lesbian/ Gay/ Bisexual Community". 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Jul}- 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



3. Approval of the proposed resolutions, as amended, is a 
policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Exhibit a 



ry Qg.oo Bi j T) Z -j, anr Poirr C.aleu'ierir™ hv Oureaer, C oTr-iti-ity 

African American 

Three bids were received. 

San rrh:viv.o Sun Reporter 

Bav V'irw | •-• ashing Cn i 

Cos: of Sample 15 5 9.66 15.00 $14.08 1029 S46.50 3.10 

Circulation, SF 10' 1,50 .62 15.000 6.17 





Small Busi Dess 


Avail. 


f>xchi 


inn 


E&JQU 


Dztz 




15 


S9.66 


15.00 


10 


1.50 
1.500 


.62 


3 


no 





5 


no 





2 


ves 


2.00 


-* 


ves 


2.00 


- 


no 


D_ 



Total 








1 


Ranki: 


ig 








2. 


Chiner.e 










One bid 


was 


rec=:v : 


sd 



Avail. 

Cost of Sample 15 

Circulation. SF 10 
Circulation, Comm 

Price, if zero 5 

Foreign language 5 

Locally owned ; 
Minority owned 
Woman owned 

Subtotal, Prop. J 41 

MBE/WBE/LBE Pre:. ios 10% 



China 


Press 


J2ai2_ 


?•- 


S 12.16 

1.500 
1.500 
no 
ves 


10 



5 


yes 

yes 

no 


2 



Total 
Ranking 



iw-..s.-*- 



45.1 



Page 1 of 
27 



24,325 


10.00 


24.325 




yes 


5. DO 


no 





ves 


2.00 




2.00 


> — 


_2^>Q 



Circulation. Coram 1.5O0 15,000 

Pries, if free 5 no yes 5.00 

Foreign Language 5 no no 

Locally owned 2 yes 2.00 yes 2.00 

Minoriry owned 2 ves 2.00 ves 2.00 

Woman owned _2 no 0_ no Q_ 

Subtotal. Prop. J -; 25.46 

MBE/WBE/LBE Pref. 10S 10 St l.c* yes 2 55 2 4 ^ 

26.51 

3 1 2 



3. Ggv {Lghk affiissaa] 

No bids were received. 
One bid was received. 



Cos: of Sample 15 

Circulation, S? 10 
Circulation, Coram 

Price, if zero 5 

Foreign language 5 

Locally ov.iied 2 

Minority owned 2 

Woman owned _2 

Subtotal, Prop. J 41 

MBE/WBE/LBE Pref. 10% 

Total 45.1 
Ranitine 



Avail. HI 1i 

Eoinis J21B. 



S12.10 


15 


3,000 


10 


3,000 




no 





yes 


5 


yes 


2 


yes 


2 


yes 


JL - 




36 




3.6 




39.6 




1 



Page 2 of 2 

28 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 8- File 98-1145 
Department: 

Item: 

Location: 
Purpose of Lease: 

Lessor: 

Lessee: 

Number of Parking 
Spaces: 

Lease Rate Payable 
By City to SF L & W 
Partnership: 

Term of Lease: 



Utilities and 
Maintenance: 

Right of Renewal: 



Department of Real Estate 
Department of Human Services 

Resolution authorizing a new lease agreement for off- 
street parking at 205 13 th Street for the Department of 
Human Services, effective August 1, 1998. 

205 13 th Street, between Mission and South Van Ness. 

Temporary parking facilities to accommodate 81 vehicles 
for use as off-street parking for employees of the 
Department of Human Services (DHS), which has offices 
at 170 Otis Street. 

SF L & W Partnership 

City and County of San Francisco 

81 parking spaces. 



$65 per parking stall per month, or $5,265 per month, or 
$63,180 annually. 

Approximately six months, or from August 1, 1998, 
through the completion of the Central Freeway 
Construction project, estimated to be January 31, 1999 
according to Mr. Allan Lucas of the Department of Real 
Estate (DRE). According to Mr. Lucas, the Lessor will 
allow the City to remain on a month-to-month holdover 
basis, if needed. 

Landlord is to pay for all utilities and maintenance costs. 

According to Mr. Lucas, the lease is renewable on a 
month-to-month basis and shall terminate upon 
completion of the State Central Freeway construction 
project, estimated to be January 31, 1999. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET, ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Source of Funds: 



$35,500 was approved to fund the lease of parking 
facilities in the FY 1998-99 budget of the Department of 
Human Services. 



Description: 



The Department of Human Services currently leases 74 
parking spaces from the State at a parking site near the 
intersection of Stevenson and Valencia Streets at a cost of 
$30.26 per stall, or $2239.24 per month. On May 1, 1998, 
the State Department of Transportation served the City 
with a 90-day notice to vacate the parking lot premises at 
Stevenson and Valencia Streets by August 1, 1998 in 
order to accommodate construction work related to the 
seismic retrofitting of the Central Freeway being 
performed by the State Department of Transportation. 

The proposed resolution would approve a new, short term 
lease of 81 parking spaces at 205 13 th Street to serve as a 
temporary parking facility, as replacement for the State- 
owned parking site that DHS must vacate. 

According to Mr. Lucas, DHS actually needs 91 parking 
spaces, or 17 more spaces than the 74 currently provided 
to DHS employees, in order to accommodate all 91 of its 
employees who work at 170 Otis Street. 

According to Mr. Ernie Radley of DHS, the 17 additional 
parking spaces are needed for 17 new employees hired for 
the CalWORKS Program. Mr. Radley reports that all 91 
of its employees at 170 Otis Street, including the 17 new 
employees must use their privately-owned vehicles to 
provide home visits, including home visits to CalWORKS 
participants and therefore, DHS believes it is appropriate 
for the City to provide parking for the 91 employees at no 
charge to the employees. 

The proposed lease would accommodate 81 of the 91 
spaces needed by DHS. According to Mr. Lucas, the 
remaining 10 spaces will be provided by the Department 
of Building Inspection (DBI). which has 10 parking spaces 
available at a leased parking lot on 13 th and Erie near the 
DHS offices at 170 Otis Street. According to Mr. Lucas, 
the per stall cost of the DBI parking spaces is $20.50 per 
month Therefore, ten parking spaces will cost $205 per 
month. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



In summary, DHS would pay a cost of $31,590 ($5,256 per 
month for approximately six months) for the lease of 81 
parking spaces under this proposed lease plus $1,230 
($205 per month for approximately six months) for the 10 
DBI spaces, for a total cost of $32,820 for 91 parking 
spaces during the estimated six month construction 
period of the Central Freeway project. 

1. According to Mr. Lucas, the proposed rental rate of $65 
per parking stall per month, for the proposed lease, 
represents fair market value. 

2. Upon completion of the Central Freeway project, DHS 
plans to resume leasing the parking spaces at the State- 
owned Valencia and Stevenson Streets parking lot. 

3. The proposed lease commences August 1, 1998, which 
is the date by which DHS must vacate premises at the 
State-owned parking lot at Valencia and Stevenson 
Streets. As such, the proposed resolution should be 
amended to provide for retroactive. 



Recommendation: 



Amend the proposed resolution to provide for 
retroactivity, in accordance with Comment No. 3 and 
approve the proposed resolution, as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 9 - File 98-1157 
Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Comments: 



Department of Administrative Services, County Clerk — 

Recorder 

Commission on the Status of Women 

Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Part 1 of the 
Administrative Code by amending Section 62.9, requiring 
that the previously authorized $30 fee, charged by the 
County Clerk - Recorder to perform ceremonies 
solemnizing the formation of a Domestic Partnership, be 
deposited in a new Same Sex Domestic Violence Programs 
Fund. This ordinance would also amend Chapter 8, Part 1 
of the Administrative Code by adding Section 8.40, to 
establish the Same Sex Domestic Violence Programs 
Fund. 

Section 62.9 of the Administrative Code authorizes the 
Department of Administrative Services, County Clerk - 
Recorder to perform a civil ceremony solemnizing the 
formation of a Domestic Partnership. Section 62.9(a) 
presently provides that each Domestic Partnership 
ceremony requires payment of a $30 fee. Presently such 
fees accrue to the General Fund. The proposed ordinance 
provides that the $30 fee shall accrue to the Same Sex 
Domestic Violence Programs Fund instead of the General 
Fund. 

The proposed ordinance would also add Section 8.40 to 
the Administrative Code to establish a new Same Sex 
Domestic Violence Programs Fund and provides that the 
Fund shall be administered by the Commission on the 
Status of Women. 

1. Mr. Fred Dugucman of the Department of 
Administrative Services, County Clerk - Recorder, 
advises that in FY 1996-97, the first year the $30 fee was 
established, 44 Domestic Partnership ceremonies were 
performed resulting in $1,320 in revenues. In FY 1997-98, 
80 Domestic Partnership ceremonies were performed, 
resulting in $2,400 in revenues. Mr. Dugucman estimates 
that annual revenues of Domestic Partnership 
Ceremonies fees would approximate the $2,400 in 
revenues realized in FY 1997-98. In accordance with the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
32 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



proposed ordinance wherein such fees would accrue to the 
new Same Sex Domestic Violence Programs Fund, such 
monies could only be expended for Same Sex Domestic 
Violence Programs. 

2. Ms. Melyssa Jo Kelly, of the Commission on the Status 
of Women, advises that the Commission on the Status of 
Women does not presently receive any monies from 
Domestic Partnership fees. Ms. Kelly reports that in FY 
1997-98 the Commission on the Status of Women funded 
the following same sex domestic violence programs with 
monies from the General Fund: 



Organization 


Service 


Amount 


CUAV (Community 


Outdoor media 


S20.000* 


United Against 


campaign related 




Violence) 


to %nolence against 
lesbian, bisexual 
and transgender 
women 




Women Inc. 


Lesbian counsebng 


20.000 


Total 




$40,000 


*Estimated 







3. According to this proposed ordinance, the fees that will 
be allocated to the Same Sex Domestic Violence Programs 
Fund would be subject to appropriation approval of the 
Board of Supervisors. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
33 



Memo to Finance Committee 

Jul}- 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 11 -File 11-1173 

1. The proposed motion would adopt a proposed schedule of audits to be 
conducted by the Budget Analyst of programs of City and County Departments. The 
motion would establish a schedule of performance or management audits and a 
priority order in which they would be performed. 

2. The table below shows the proposed schedule of audits in priority order and 
the status of audits that are either in progress or currently scheduled. 



Audit 



Estimated Audit Hours. Status of Audits 
and Budget Data 



Treasurer/Tax Collector Update 400 audit hours. Audit started in 1998; 

expected completion in August, 1998. 



FY 1998-99 Budget. Data : 
Total Budget 
General Fund Budget 



$15,394,600 
$14,169,650 



Department of Parking and 
Traffic 



1,200 audit hours. Audit started in July 
1998; expected completion in 
December, 1998. 



FY 1998-99 Budget Data : 
Total Budget 
General Fund Budget 



$54,589,847 
$37,375,739 



San Francisco Zoo 



1,290 audit hours. Audit will commence in 
Fall, 1998. 



FY 1998-99 Budget Data : 
Total Budget 
General Fund Budget 



$15,026,047 
$4,050,050 



Assessor / Recorder 



1,300 audit hours. Audit not vet scheduled. 



FY 1998-99 Budget Data : 
Total Budget 
General Fund Budget 



$11,533,069 
$9,378,171 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Audit 



San Francisco Redevelopment 
Agency 



Estimated Audit Hours. Status of Audits 
and Budget Data 

Audit not yet scheduled. On January 31, 
1992, the Budget Analyst completed a 
limited scope management audit of the San 
Francisco Redevelopment Agency. 1,011 
total audit hours were expended for that 
limited scope management audit. A 
comprehensive management audit would 
require an estimated 2,000 audit hours. 



FY 1998-99 Budget Data: 

Total Budget 

General Fund Budget* 



$101,971,000 
$31,589,000 



* Includes General Fund contribution and tax 
increment funds. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Memo to Finance Committee 

July 29, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 12 -File 11-1137 

1. The proposed motion requests that a management audit of the San Francisco 
Housing Authority be added to the Audit Work Plan of the Budget Analyst. The 
proposed motion also states that the management audit of the San Francisco 
Housing Authority should be given priority and be conducted at the earliest 
juncture. 

2. The Budget Analyst last performed a management audit of the San Francisco 
Housing Authority in 1993 and the final report for that audit was issued on 
November 24, 1993. The current annual operating budget for the San Francisco 
Housing Authority is $41,301,910. The Housing Authority receives no General Fund 
contribution from the City. 

3. A total of 1,798 professional staff hours was required to complete the 1993 
management audit of the San Francisco Housing Authority. A similar level of effort 
for the proposed management audit would cost $144,685 under the Budget 
Analyst's Fiscal Year 1998-99 contract, using the current hourly rate of $80.47 per 
professional staff hour. 



Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



DOCl impntS DEFT. 



fyt 



\25 

^FINANCE COMMITTEE 
.BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AUG (1C 10QO 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

' SAN FRANCISCO 

REGULAR MEETING PUBLIC LIBRARY 



WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5. 1998 - 1:00 P.M. VETERANS BUILDING 

401 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 

MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

Meeting Commenced: 1: 05 p.m. 

CONSENT CALENDAR 

1. All items listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are 

considered to be routine by the Committee and will be acted upon 
by a single, roll-call vote of the Committee. There will be no 
separate discussion of these items unless a member of the 
Committee or the public so requests, in which event the matter 
shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a 
separate item. 

a. File 98-1241 . [Reserved Funds, Fire Department] Hearing to 
consider release of reserved funds, Fire Department (1986 
Fire Protection Bond interest earnings, Ordinance No. 
127-96), in the amount of $478,250, to fund repairs and 
improvements to the Fireboat Phoenix. (Fire Department) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Release of $478,250 approved. Filed. 

b. File 98-1191 . [Emergency Repair, Buena Vista Terrace 
Sewer] Resolution approving the expenditure of funds for 
the emergency repair work to replace the structurally 
inadequate sewer on Buena Vista Terrace between 14th Street 
and Duboce Avenue - $217,935. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 

c. File 98-1192 . [Emergency Repair, 5th Street/Shipley Avenue 
Sewer] Resolution approving the expenditure of funds for 
the emergency repair work to replace the structurally 
inadequate sewer on 5th Street at Shipley Avenue - 
$81,756.79. (Public Utilities Commission) 

SPEAKERS: None. 

ACTION: Recommended. 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 98-1179 . [Appropriation, Administrative Services] 
Ordinance appropriating $30,100,000, Administrative Services, 
from Convention Facilities Fund Balance to finance land 
acquisition, improvements, and tenant relocation for the Moscone 
Convention Center expansion, for fiscal year 1998-99. RO 
#98008. (Supervisor Yaki) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; John Madden, Assistant 
Controller - provided information; Jack 
Moerschbaecher , Director, Convention Facilities - 
support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

File 98-1176 . [Settlement of Grievance, Fariba Mahmoudi] 
Ordinance authorizing settlement of the pay grievance of Fariba 
Mahmoudi filed pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding 
between the International Federation of Professional and 
Technical Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, and the City and County 
of San Francisco in the amount of Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred 
Twenty-Six Dollars and Fifty Cents ($16,826.50). (Department of 
Human Resources) 
(Consideration continued from 7/29/98) 

SPEAKERS: Alice Villagomez, Dept . of Human Resources - requested 
continuance on behalf of union. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Consideration continued to the Call of 
the Chair. 



File 98-1120 . [Settlement of Grievance] Ordinance authorizing 
settlement of the pay grievance of Mark Dorian filed pursuant to 
Memorandum of Understanding between the International Federation 
of Professional and Electrical Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, and 
the City and County of San Francisco in the amount of Eighteen 
Thousand Dollars ($18,000.00). (Department of Human Resources) 
(Consideration continued from 7/22/98) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Alice Villagomez, Dept. 
of Human Resources - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

File 98-0059 . [Vehicle Registration Fee, Police Department] 
Resolution authorizing a fee of one dollar ($1.00) to be paid at 
time of vehicle registration renewal, or supplemental 
application for vehicles registered to an address within the 
City and County of San Francisco to be used exclusively to fund 
police programs related to fingerprinting identification of 
persons committing crimes while operating motor vehicles. 
(Police Commission) 






SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; John Madden, Assistant 
Controller - provided information; Inspector Michael 
Gaynor, SFPD - support; Jim Norris, SFPD - support; 
Ligaya Avenida, Dept. of Human Resources, SFUSD - 
support; Jerry Coleman, Office of the District 
Attorney - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

File 98-1254 . [Sale of Real Property] Ordinance authorizing the 
Public Utilities Commission to prepare and solicit invitations 
to bid and/or hold a public auction for the sale of the Bernal 
Property located in Alameda County, subject to the review and 
approval by the Board of Supervisors, by Resolution, and Mayor 
of any final sale of the Bernal Property. (Supervisor Yaki) 



SPEAKERS : 



ACTION: 



Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Andy Moran, Public 
Utilities Commission - support. 

Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-0664. [Municipal Elections Code] Ordinance amending 
Elections Code Sections 830 and 840 to reduce the fee for 
publication of ballot arguments in the voter information 
pamphlet from $200 plus $3 per word to $200 plus $2 per word and 
increase the value of signatures submitted in lieu of fees from 
$.25 per signature to $.50 per signature. (Supervisor Yee) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Supervisor Yee - support; 
Ted Lakey, Deputy City Atty. - provided information; 
Naomi Nishioka, Acting Registrar of Voters - provided 
information; Richard Ow - support; Tony Kilroy - 
support; Joe Lacey - support; Maurice Dopp - support; 
Doug Comstock - support; Frederick Hobson - support; 
Norman Rolfe - support; Edward Evans - support; Robert 
Pender - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended beginning on line 6 after 

"signature" to add "; effective January 1, 1999."; 
amended beginning on line 19 to add "Section 2. The 
provisions of this ordinance shall become effective 
January 1, 1999." (See new title). Recommended as 
amended. 

New Title: [Municipal Elections Code] Ordinance 
amending Elections Code Sections 830 and 840 to reduce 
the fee for publication of ballot arguments in the 
voter information pamphlet from $200 plus $3 per word 
to $200 plus $2 per word and increase the value of 
signatures submitted in lieu of fees from $.25 per 
signature to $.50 per signature; effective January 1, 
1999. (Supervisors Yee, Newsom) 



NOTE: 



Supervisor Newsom added as co-sponsor. 



0-96 



*/?? 



Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn, Dept. 41 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



July 31, 1998 
TO: c Finance Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst *«..— .**!•*"..•* ^ <nee*^ of. 

SUBJECT: August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 
Item la -File 98-1241 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

AUG 5 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Department: 
Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Fire Department (SFFD) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Hearing to consider the release of $478,250 held on 
reserve for the repair and improvement of the Fireboat 
Phoenix. 

$478,250 

Previously reserved interest accrued on Fire Protection 
Systems Improvement General Obligation Bonds 

In November of 1986, San Francisco voters approved 
Proposition A for the issuance of $46.2 million in Fire 
Protection Systems Improvement General Obligation 
Bonds. These bonds were to finance the City's Auxiliary 
Water Supply System (AWSS). The AWSS is a system of 
reservoirs, cisterns, pipelines, pump stations and 
fireboats, used as a water supply source for fire protection 
in emergency situations. 

In 1987, the City sold $31 million of Fire Protection 
Systems Improvement Bonds and the remaining $15.2 
million in 1991 for a total of $46.2 million. In March of 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



1996, the Board of Supervisors approved a Supplemental 
Appropriation of $3,907,900 from accrued interest earned 
on the Fire Protection Systems Improvement Bonds for 
four types of capital improvements: (1) repair and 
improvement of the Fireboat Phoenix, (2) installation of 
motorized AWSS Control Valves, (3) repairs to AWSS 
Water Storage Tanks, and (4) emergency repairs of AWSS 
facilities. 



Budget: 



Comment: 



Recommendation: 



The Board of Supervisors placed $3,269,850 of the 
$3,907,900 on reserve, pending submission of contract 
cost details. A a total of $427,655 has been previously 
released, resulting in a remaining balance on reserve of 
$2,842,195. This request would authorize the release of 
$478,250 in previously reserved funds for the repair and 
improvement of the Fireboat Phoenix 

DPW received two responsive bids for the repair and 
improvement of Fireboat Phoenix. Attachment 1 to this 
report, provided by DPW, is a tabulation of the two bids. 
The low bid was submitted by Stone Boat Yard. A 
summary budget of the cost is as follows: 

Construction $469,425 

Contingency - 10% 46,943 

DPW Construction Management and Design* 53.500 

Total Construction $569,868 

Total Requested Release of Reserve 478,250 

Balance from previously appropriated 

Fire Department funds $91,618 

* See Attachment 2 provided by DPW for details. 

According to Mr. Patrick Rivera of DPW. the proposed 
contract to Stone Boat Yard states that work must be 
completed in 220 calendar days after the contract 
commences. DPW expects work to begin on the Fireboat 
Phoenix in mid September and expects the work to be 
completed by no later than April 30, 1999. 

Approve the requested release of reserved funds in the 
amount of $478,250. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



EC NO.: 



City and County of San Francisco 

Department of Public Works 

TABULATION OF BIDS 

(REVISED) 



7524E 



SFFD Fireboat "Phoenix" 

Biennial Maintenance and Improvements 



Attachment 1 









ll 


^Ml¥l^ 


11 


■JUL 01 ife; 


J 


By 






S RECEIVED: 
DERS: 



June 24. 1998 



Stone Boat Yard 
Bay Ship £ Yacht Co. 



WBE 
No Pref. 

Average Bid: 

Engineer's Estimate: 

% of Engineer's Estimate: 



Base 


Bid 


459.425 


649 


943 


£59 


534 


428 


750 


12 


1 O' 

I /o 



amount revised for correction of Stone Boat Yard Alunit bid Drice in bid item No. 27. 



PARENT LOW BIDDER: 



Stone Boat Yard 
2517 Blanding Avenue 

Alameda. CA 94501 
Te! (510) 523-3030 



BCON7RACTORS: 



Delta Sand Blasting 

Western Industrial 

Webb Engineering 

PCI 

Pacific Chemical 

Bob Jew 
Mark Primeau 
Linda Chin 



Harlan Kelly 
Don Eng 
Foon Chow 



Sand Blasting & Paint 

Welding 

Heat Exchange Cleaning 

Insulation 

Gas Free Certs 

DPW Accounting 
Maurice Williams 
Bill Webb 



27.400 


23.500 


1.500 


7.200 


2.050 


Helen Liu 


All bidders 



25. 1998 



JUL 29 



•93 10: 21AM CCSF,DPW,BOe.,nwJcv., 



A 1 1 a crimen t 2 



rireboat Phoenix 



Class. 
No-, 
5318 
5208 
5255 



Titie_ 

^C^Sction Inspector 

Civil Engineer 
Mechanical Engineer 
Prevailing Wage Monitoring 



Cost per 

Ho urs JjgjJL - 
528 I 68.00 
108 $ 83.47 
73 $ 83.26 



say 



T„ta> Duties, 

V^?9MWFieldlnspertor 
S g 014.76 Construction Manager 
$ 6,077.98 Design Support 
S 2,500.00 

T53795.7T 
$ 53,500.00 



Post-ir Fax Note 

To 



7671 



/■^c- €-y t '-i^ ■~ i 



-"' ,:i7-^/ 



7/2/ 



./. 



* mt /kf!/ejL.&(aM 



►*>«•* • *•<-! 



- /-'S2- 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lb- File 98-1191 
Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



Comment: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $217,935 for emergency repair work to replace 
the structurally inadequate sewer on Buena Vista Terrace 
between 14 th Street and Duboce Avenue. 

$217,935 

FY 1997-9S PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on February 
2, 1998 the sewer located on Buena Vista Terrace between 
14 th Street and Duboce Avenue had failed and immediate 
repairs were required in order to protect the health, 
welfare and property of the Citizens of San Francisco. 
The PUC declared an emergency on February 2, 1998. In 
accordance with Section 6.30 of the Administrative Code, 
the PUC initiated expedited contract procedures and the 
PUC awarded a contract to Uniacke Construction, Inc. in 
the amount of $150,360. Changes to the contract resulted 
in the final construction cost increasing by $16,925 to 
$167,285. 

The total estimated project cost is $217,935 including 
$167,285 for construction work and $50,650 for DPW 
design and construction management costs. Attachment I 
details the costs incurred by the Contractor. Attachment 
II details the DPW design and construction management 
costs. 

1. Mr. P.T. Law of the DPW advises that due to the 
emergency nature of the repair work (collapse of part of 
Buena Vista Terrace) the first available contractor, 
Uniacke Construction, Inc. was selected to complete the 
repair project. 

2. Mr. Law advises that due to additional curb and 
sidewalk restoration work, the final payment to Uniacke 
Construction, Inc. was $167,285 or $16,925 more than the 
bid amount of $150,360. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



3. Mr. Law reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on February 3, 1998 and was completed on 
February 26, 1998. 

4. Mr. Norman Chan of the DPW advises that due to 
various delays m receiving expenditure documentation 
from Uniacke Construction, Inc., the PUC is requesting 
approval of this proposed resolution approximately five 
months after the construction work was completed. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



AXIAUHMENT I 
Psoe no. : 



^2 I9S8 23:22.=*-: PI 




ATTACHMENT II 
Buena Vista Terrace Emergency Sewer Repair 



Hydraulics 



Classification 


Rate Hours 


Cost 


5504 


$92 25 


$2,300 


5206 


$75 100 


$7,500 


5204 


$62 105 


$6,510 


5366 


$60 103 


$6,180 


5381 


$33 1 00 


$3,300 


1426 


$43 20 


$860 



Construction Management 



Classification 


-:-.-•- 


Hours 


Cost _ 


5210 


$100 


28 


$2,800 


5208 


$80 


100 


$8,000 


5204 


$62 


100 


$6,200 


6318 


$70 


100 


$7,000 



$24,000 



Total $50,650 



Post-ir Fax Note 7571 


|i&»* (o 


To ;jWriNe MouaU 


From P.T. uW 


""^slu* ft, tw 


Co. 


' ■> Vtvt* 


Pnon "SSHS3Hl- 


*"2Sa-046l 


F u • 



Page 1 of 1 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item lc-File 98-1192 
Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



Comment: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $81,756.79 for emergency repair work to 
replace the structurally inadequate sewer on 5 th Street at 
Shipley Avenue. 

$81,756.79 

1994 Sewer Bond Fund 

The Public Utilities Commission advises that on August 
15, 1997 the sewer located on 5 th at Shipley Avenue had 
failed and immediate repairs were required in order to 
protect the health, welfare and property of the Citizens of 
San Francisco. The PUC declared an emergencj 7 on 
August 25, 1997. In accordance with Section 6.30 of the 
Administrative Code, the PUC initiated expedited 
contract procedures and the PUC awarded a contract to 
the sole bidder, Esquivel Grading & Paving, Inc., in the 
amount of $48,256.79. 

The total estimated project cost is $81,756.79 including 
$48,256.79 for construction work and $33,500 for DPW 
design and construction management costs. Attachment I 
details the costs incurred by the Contractor. Attachment 
II details DPW design and construction management 
costs. 

1. Mr. P.T. Law of the DPW, advises that 20 firms were 
contacted regarding this project but only one company 
submitted a bid. The sole bidder was Esquivel Grading 
and Paving Inc. The bid was submitted on August 22, 
1997 in the amount of $52,825. 

2. Mr. Law advises that various bid items were deleted 
from the contract. Therefore the final payment to 
Esquivel Grading & Paving, Inc was $48,256.79 or 
$4,568.10 less than the bid amount of $52,825. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



3. Mr. Law reports that the repair work of the damaged 
sewer began on August 22. 1997 and was completed on 
December 8, 1997. Attachment III explains why the 
repair work took approximately three and one half 
months to complete. 

4. Mr. Norman Chan of the DPW advises that due to 
various delays in receiving expenditure documentation 
from Esquivel Grading & Paving, Inc., the PUC is 
requesting approval of this proposed resolution 
approximately eight months after the construction work 
was completed. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



ATTACHMENT I 



LU 
< 



g 

2 00 





O 


r 


( 5 


< 


O 


HI 


^3 


Q 


< 




LXJ 




OC 




ATTACHMENT II 
5th/Shipley Streets Emergency Sewer Repair 

Hydraulics 



Classification 


Rate 


Hours 




Cost 


5504 


$ 


92 


20 


$ 


1,840 


5206 


S 


75 


60 


S 


4,500 


5204 


$ 


62 


75 


S 


4.650 


5366 


$ 


60 


71 


S 


4,260 


5381 


$ 


33 


52 


s 


1,716 


1426 


s 


43 


30 


s 


1,290 



S 18,256 



Construction Management 



Classification 


Rate 


Hours 




Cost 


5210 


S 100 


13 


$ 


1,300 


5208 


S 80 


63 


S 


5,040 


5204 


$ 62 


52 


s 


3,224 


6318 


S 70 


24 


$ 


1.680 



Traffic Engineering 



Cost 



$ 11,244 



4,000 



4,000 



Total 



S 33,500 



Page 1 of 1 



12 



ATTACHMENT III 



To: Justine Nolan 

Fax No.: 252-0461 

From: P. T. Law 

Phone No.: 554-8347 

Justine, 



Here is a summary for the contract delay for 5*/Shipley. You are more than welcome to 
shorten the summary if you wish. But this is the shortest and most detailed summary I 
was able to obtain. 



Thank you for your assistance. 
P.T. Law 



Before construction, the Resident Engineer was notified by property owner next to the 
construction site that he was in the process of demolishing his building, and he needed to 
evict his tenants. The tenants needed extra time to vacate the premises. To avoid traffic 
conflict, the Resident Engineer agreed to delay the construction start date. The 
Contractor, Esquivel Grading & Paving, was also instructed by a BCM manager to 
complete another contract on Bay Street (Fisherman's Wharf area) so construction would 
not interfere with tourist traffic. In addition, Esquivel, Grading & Paving was the only 
Contractor who submitted a quotation for this contract. Because of the situation noted, 
the Resident Engineer granted a no cost time extension for the time overrun related to this 
contract. 



13 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 2 -File 98-1179 

Department: Department of Administrative Services 

Convention Facilities Management 

Item: Supplemental Appropriation in the amount of S30, 100,000 to 

finance land acquisition, improvements, and tenant relocation 
for the Moscone Convention Center expansion. 



Amount: 



S30. 100.000 



Source of Funds: Unappropriated Convention Facilities Funds - Fund Balance. 
The source of funds for the Fund Balance is comprised of a) 
revenues in excess of appropriations from Hotel Tax Funds 
allocated directly to the Convention Facilities Fund, b) 
operating revenues from rentals and concessions related to the 
operation of the Moscone Convention Center, and c) revenue 
transfers from the General Fund. 

Description: In March, 1996, San Francisco voters approved a ballot 

measure to authorize issuance of lease revenue bonds, in an 
amount not to exceed S157.500.000. for the development of a 
new facility to provide additional convention meeting and 
exhibit space to supplement the Moscone Center. The proposed 
new facility would contain 300,000 square feet for such meeting 
and exhibit space. The existing Moscone Convention Center, 
which was originally built as a 300,000 square feet facility and 
was expanded by an additional 300.000 square feet in a two- 
phase project finally completed in 1992, now encompasses a 
total of 600,000 square feet in convention meeting and exhibit 
space. Upon completion of the proposed new facility, the total 
area of meeting and exhibition space would amount to 900,000 
square feet. 

To date, none of the $157,500,000 in lease revenue bonds 
authorized by the voters have been sold because available 
Convention Facilities Funds have been sufficient to support 
expected expenditures through the end of Fiscal Year 1998-99. 
Further, by not selling such bonds, capitalized interest costs 
have not been incurred by the City. Capitalized interest 
expenses are required interest payments on bonds during the 
period between the sale of the bonds and the completion of the 
capital improvement project because operating revenues are 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

not available to support debt service until the project is 
complete. 

However, total appropriations of S45.458.000 have been 
allocated for the project to date. The source of funds for such 
appropriations includes S29.000.000 in Convention Facilities 
Funds appropriated in the Fiscal Year 1996-97 budget and 
unexpended lease revenue bond funds and interest earnings 
from the previous Moscone Expansion project finally completed 
in 1993 in the amount of S16, 458,000. According to Mr. 
Leonard Tom. Financial Manager for the Moscone Convention 
Center Expansion Project, a total of approximately $4,229,000 
in such appropriations have been expended through March 31. 
1998 for the following purposes: 

Land Purchase - Real Estate Services and Permits $ 31,000 

Project Management (Includes Environmental Review) 

Consultants 203,000 

City Department.- 1.330,000 

Design - Architectural Services 2.665.000 

Total $4. 229, 000 

If the $30,100,000 in Convention Facility funds requested 
through this supplemental appropriation is approved, and 
therefore added to existing appropriations of S45.458.000, total 
appropriations for the Moscone Convention Center Expansion 
would amount to S75.558.000. According to Mr. Tom, additional 
funds are required to acquire approximately 189,226 square 
feet of land area, at a total estimated cost to the City of 
S57.000.000, or an average cost of S301.23 per square foot in 
order to accommodate the proposed new facility that will 
contain 300.000 square feet of meeting and exhibition space. To 
date, the environmental review process and the design 
development phase have been completed and work has begun 
on the construction documents. The project's goal is to begin 
construction of the new facility for the Moscone Convention 
Center Expansion Project in February. 2000. In order to meet 
that goal, according to Mr. Tom. the land acquisition phase 
must begin this summer. 

According to Mr. Jack Moerschbaecher, Director of Convention 
Facilities, the land acquisition necessary for the Moscone 
Convention Center Expansion Project is expected to require an 
eminent domain lawsuit. Eminent domain is the legal right of a 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

15 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



governmental entity to appropriate private property for public 
use, after compensating the owner for the fair market value of 
the property. Prior to filing such a lawsuit, the Board of 
Supervisors must adopt, by a two-thirds vote, a resolution of 
public interest and necessity to appropriate the property. Such 
a resolution will be submitted to the Board of Supervisors by 
the Department of Real Estate for introduction on Monday, 
August 3, 1998, with a proposed public hearing date before the 
full Board on August 24, 1998. A description of the property to 
be acquired for the Moscone Convention Center Expansion 
project is provided in Attachment 1 to this report. Attachment 2 
to this report provides a map of the land area that would be 
acquired. 

Based on an appraisal by the Department of Real Estate, the 
fair market value of the property to be acquired by eminent 
domain totals $57,000,000. The table below summarizes the 
cost, land area, cost per square foot of land and existing 
improvements for the proposed property to be acquired. 



Property 



Total Cost per 

Appraised Square Square 

Fair Market Footage Foot of 

Value of Land Land 



Existing Improvements 



1. Hearst Corporation 
Parking Lot - 860 
Howard Street 



2. 325 Minna Street 



3. 150 4th Street 



515,000,000 109,977 S136.39 



4.000,000 13.999 285.73 



38,000,000 55,250 687.78 



Asphalt Paving, chain link 
fence and parking control 
equipment - used as a fee 
parking lot for approximately 
440 automobiles 

Office and Retail building of 
approximately 28,500 rentable 
square feet 

Office and Retail building, 
including a rentable area of 
approximately 272,500 square 
feet of office and retail area and 
basement parking for 
approximately 140 
automobiles. 



4. Holland Court 
Total 



no cost 



1 0.000 



557,000,000 189,226 5301.23 



0.00 A dedicated City street. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 



16 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



The requested $30,100,000 supplemental appropriation is to 
add to existing appropriations of $45,458,000 to support total 
estimated project expenditures through Fiscal Year 1998-99 of 
$75,558,000. The proposed budget for the full amount of 
$75,558,000, to be expended over the three-year period from 
Fiscal Year 1996-97 through Fiscal Year 1998-99 is shown 
below. Attachment 3 to this report, provided by Mr. Tom, 
furnishes additional details on the costs for the consultants, 
including a list of the consultants retained, and the costs for 
City Departments to support the budget as shown below. 
LAND PURCHASE 

Land Price (Formal Offer) 7, 000,000 

Tenant Relocation Allowance 1.600,000 

Related Costs (legal, fees, etc.) 
Dept. of Real Estate wk orders 55,000 

City Attorney wk orders 30,000 

Litigation allowance (direct) 1 50,000 

Appraisal phase 1 60,000 

Appraisal phase 2 150,000 

Permits & fees 212.000 

LAND PURCHASE TOTAL 559.257,000 

PROJECT MANAGEMENT Includes Environmental Review) 
City Department Costs 
Project Staff (FY 1996-97) S 434,000 

DPW sen-ices w/Project Management (FY 1 ,799,000 

1997-98 through FY 1998-99) 

City Planning Dept. 400,000 

City Attorney 167,000 

Art Commission 330,000 

Fire Department 20.000 

Building Dept. (services) 62,000 

Building Dept. (site permit) 800,000 

Parking & Transportation 40,000 

Other miscellaneous depts. 5 1 .000 

City Dept. Subtotal S 4,103,000 

Consultant Services 794,000 

Project Management Contingency 460.000 

PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOTAL S 5.357.000 

DESIGN 

.Architectural Sen-ices S 9,510,000 

Pre-Construction Management 1.434.000 

DESIGN TOTAL SI 0.944.000 

GRAND TOTAL 575.558,000 * 

* Includes $4,229,000 in expenditures through March 31, 1998. 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Comments: 1. The current estimated total project cost for the 

proposed Moscone Convention Center Expansion Project 
is approximately S319.000.000. The source of funds for 
the project will be Convention Facility Funds, net bond 
proceeds from the $157,500,000 in authorized lease 
revenue bonds, and interest earnings on the bond 
proceeds. A summary budget including estimated revenue 
sources and expenditures is shown below. 

Revenues 

Convention Facility Funds $ 202,944,000 

Net Bond Proceeds from the sale of $157,500,000 
in bonds less issuance costs, debt service 
reserve and capitalized interest 1 1 3,003,000 

Bond Interest 3.073.200 

Total Revenues S3 19,020,200 

Expenditures 

Land Acquisition, demolition, relocation; S 99,972.000* 

Design/Construction Management 

Construction (including furnishings) 191,000,000 

Off-Site Infrastructure (Street improvements; 2,755,000 

utilities; public lighting) 

Project Management 12,900,900 

Contingency (6.5% of Construction costs) 12.392.300 

Total Estimated Project Costs S3 1 9,020,200 

* Land acquisition, demolition, relocation; Design, and 
Construction Management costs of $99,972,000 
includes the $57,000,000 fair market appraisal for the 
actual purchase of the properties to be acquired for the 
new facility. 

According to Mr. Tom, construction is expected to begin in 
February, 2000 with project completion estimated in 
February, 2003. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

1 R 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



2. Attachment 3 to this report provides a detailed 
breakdown of costs for City Department and consulting 
services in support of the Moscone Convention Center 
Expansion Project for the three year period ending June 
30, 1999. According to Mr. Tom, all consultant selection 
for the Expansion Project has been done either through a 
competitive Request-for-Proposal (RFP) process or have 
been chosen from the Department of Public Works' "As 
Needed" consultants. DPW "As Needed" consultants are 
first selected through a competitive RFP process to enter 
into an initial contract, and then must provide proposals 
before being selected for specific engagements. 



Recommendation: Approval of the proposed supplemental appropriation is a 

policy matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 



Attachment 1 



OVERVIEW 

PREFERRED SITE FOR MOSCONE EXPANSION SITE 

ASSESSOR'S BLOCK 3724 



HEARST CORPORATION PARKING LOT 109,977 square feet 

Hearst Corp. Lots 18, 35-38, 69 

350 feet of frontage on Howard St. at the NWC of Holland Ct.; 229 feet of 
frontage on Minna St. Currently improved for use as fee parking. Paved with asphalt 
and fenced with chain link. 



325 MINNA STREET 1 2,999 square feet 

Chelsea Development, et al (Nishkian Trust, Harold Moose, et al - a partnership) 

Lot 68 

Currently improved with a 2 story and basement, concrete office and restaurant 
building of ±28,500 rentable square feet which covers the entire site. 125 feet of 
frontage on Minna St.; 48 feet of frontage on the west line of Holland Ct.; 40 feet of 
frontage at the northerly terminus of Holland Ct. Occupied by (1 ) Cadillac Bar & Grill, 
(2) Nishkian & Associates, Structural Engineers (associated with building ownership), 
and (3) Department of Corrections, State of California. 

1 50 4th STREET 55,250 square feet 

WCB II More Limited Partnership (Brad Baker, Sr. VP; Newport Beach) Lot 70 

The existing improvements to be demolished. Currently improved with a 
±272,500 rentable square foot, 6 story concrete and steel office and retail building with 
basement parking. Building covers the entire site. 350 feet of frontage on 4th St., 160 
feet on Howard St., 150 feet on Minna St., and 275 feet on Holland Ct. Current office 
tenants (±20) include U.C. Berkeley Extension, State Compensation Insurance Fund, 
Pacific Bell Directory Services and Sumitomo Bank. Retail tenants include Chevy's, 
Willow Street Pizza, TGI Friday's and Bank of America. 



HOLLAND COURT (A DEDICATED STREET) 1 1 ,000 square feet 

The entire street to be vacated and included in the footprint of the new structure. 

TOTAL AREA OF PREFERRED SITE ±189,226 Square Feet 

±4.344 Acres 



Attachmeni 



6-< 

W 

cr: 

00 

o 

>— I 
00 
00 



PROPOSED MOSCONE EXPANSION 

BLOCK 3724 
4TH STREET 




\ 



LP. 



050 

WCB II MORE 
53,250 sq. ft 
150 4TH STREET 
7C 

:75 



^HOLLAND COURT 



227 



18 

5 

— 

HEARST PUBLISHING 
109,977 sq.ft. 
860 HOWARD- ST. 

275 



^CONTINENTAL DEVELOPMENT COR?. 
(WELLS FARGO DATA CENTER) 
65 
101,276 sq.ft. 

155 5th St. 



5TH STREET 




E-« 
&q 

Oi 

» — i 

oo 

»— — < 
< 



SCALE 1": 100' 



PKKTED 9-20-96 



c\xc*0M^pRWNCSVU^Sua724JaG 



21 



MOSCONE CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT 

SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION REQUEST FY 98/99 

BUDGETED HOURS AND RATES, CITY DEPTS. & CONSULTANTS 7/1/96-6/30/99 



Attachment 3 - Pang 1 nf ? 



suppapp98C1 
7/29/98 



Department/Consultant 



Budgeted 
Amount 



Position/Expense 



Budgeted Budgeted Budgeted 
Hours Rate Cost 



Summary 



LAND PURCHASE 
Dept. of Real Estate work orders 

City Attorney work orders 



Litigation Allowance (direct) 



55,000 Sr. Real Property Officer 

30,000 Deputy City Attorney(s) 
60,000 Appraisal Phase 1 
150,000 Appraisal Phase 2 

150,000 Deputy City Attorney(s) 
direct litigation costs 



592 S 



93 S 55,000 



273 110 


30,000 




Estimates provided by 


60,000 




Dept. of Real Estate 


150.000 


240,000 


910 110 


100,100 
49.90.Q 


150,000 



PROJECT MANAGEMENT 
Mayor (MCEP staff FY 96-97) 



DPW services w/Proj. Manager 



BCM/Surveys 
BCM/SAR 

City Planning Dept. 



City Attorney 
Art Commission 



Fire Department 
Building Inspection 
Parking & Traffic 

Other Miscellaneous Depts. 



434,000 Project Manager 

Deputy Project Manager 
Financial Manager 
Asst. Project manager 
Admininistrative Assistant 
Direct Expenses 

1,799,000 Project Manager 

Deputy Project Manager 
Financial Manager 
Asst. Project manager 
Admininistrative Assistant 
Direct Expenses 
Surveyor(s) 
Civil Engineer(s) 

400,000 OER Director 

Env. Review Officer 
Sr. Planner 
environmental consultants 

167,000 Deputy City Attomey(s) 

330,000 Program Director 
Assistant Director 
Staff support 
Direct Expenses 
Artist(s) by contract 

20,000 Fire Inspectors 

62.000 Sr. Building Inspectors 

40,000 Sr. Traffic Engineer(s) 
Traffic Engineer(s) 

51,000 Project Manager (CAO) 

Electrical Engineer(s) (PTC) 
other as needed engineers 



2088 S 


58 


S 120.269 




1644 


46 


75,765 




1544 


45 


73,958 




2088 


38 


78,422 




865 


25 


21,712 
63,875. 


S 434.000 


4176 


97 


406.847 




4176 


75 


313,200 




4176 


69 


286,891 




4176 


65 


269,352 




4176 


44 


181,710 
120,000 




2167 


42 


91,000 




2031 


64 


130 000 


1,799,000 


525 


51 


26,775 




1750 


40 


70,000 




1240 


51 


63,225 

240.000 


400,000 


1518 


110 


167,000 


167,000 


660 


65 


42,900 




585 


60 


35,100 




400 


30 


12,000 

85,000 

155.000 


330.000 


363 


55 


19,965 


19.965 


1000 


62 


62,000 


62,000 


214 


70 


15,000 




455 


55 


25,000 


40.000 


600 


60 


36.000 




67 


60 


4,000 




183 


60 


11,000 





51.000 



Source: Moscone Center Expansion Project 



22 



MOSCONE CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT 
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION REQUEST FY 
BUDGETED HOURS AND RATES, CITY DEPTS. & 



Department/Consultant 



Budgeted 
Amount 



98/99 

CONSULTANTS 7/1/96-6/30/99 



Position/Expense 



Attachme nt 3 - Page ? of ? 

suppapp98C1 
7/29/98 



Budgeted Budgeted Budgeted 
Hours Rate Cost Summary 



CONSULTANT SERVICES 

Transportation (DKS) 

Site Assessment (Malcom Drilling) 
(Archeo-Tecffetra-Tec) 

Wind/Shadow (Environmental 
Science Associates) 

Geotechnical (Treadwell & Rollo) 

(Transpacific) 



Archeology (Archeo-Tec) 



Miscellaneous (Don Todd) 



182,000 Sr. Transportation Engineer 

256.000 drilling 

site investigator(s)/analyst(s) 

15,000 Lead Investigator 
Technician/Artist 

306,000 Principal 

Project Manager 

Principal 

Project Manager(s) 

Staff 

direct expenses 

27.000 Principal Investigator 
Research Associate 
Research Assistant 

8.000 Manager 

Estimator(s) 

Total - Consultants 



DESIGN 
Architects (Gensler/Michael Willis/ S 9.510,000 Principal (Gensler) 
Kwan Henmi Joint Venture) 



PRE-CONSTRUCTION 
MANAGEMENT 
(EPC Consultants) 



(Luster/Structus) 
(to be determined) 



1820 S 

849 
1000 

50 
135 

100 

300 

294 
1500 
2000 



100 
173 
200 

75 
100 



250 S 



100 


S 182.000 


225 


191.000 


65 


65 000 


125 


6.250 


65 


8 750 


130 


13,000 


90 


27.000 


97 


2e.500 


65 


97,500 


45 


90.000 




50 000 


85 


8.500 


55 


9.500 


45 


9.000 



S 182.000 



256.000 



15.000 



3.900 
4.1Q0 



306.000 



27.000 



LQQQ 

S 794.000 



250 S 62.439 



Principal (Kwan Henmi) 


254 


155 


39.370 


Principal (Michael Wills) 


255 


130 


33.150 


Project Director 


6000 


135 


810.000 


Project Designer(s) 


5000 


150 


750.000 


Project Architect(s) 


8000 


110 


880.000 


Senior Architect(s) 


11000 


75 


825.000 


Architect(s) 


12000 


60 


720.000 


Technician(s) 


12000 


45 


540,000 


Subconsultants 






3.000.000 


Direct Expenses 






jLasojaoQ 

S 9.509.959 


.434.000 








Principal 


122 


133 


S 16.200 


Project Manager 


1100 


81 


89.100 


Engineer(s) 


1200 


63 


75.600 


Administrative Assistant 


900 


29 


26.100 


Subconsultants 






200.000 


Direct Expenses 






100.000 


Project Director 


650 


103 


67.000 


Subconsultants 






110.000 
750 ono 

S 1.434,000 



Source: Moscone Center Expansion Project 



23 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 3 -File 98-1176 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 
29, 1998. 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Department of Human Resources (DHR) 
Department of Transportation 

Ordinance authorizing the settlement of a pay grievance 
of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi filed against the City pursuant 
to the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, in the amount of 
$16,826.50. 

The proposed ordinance would approve a settlement 
against the City in the amount of $16,826.50 for a 
grievance filed on behalf of Ms. Fariba Mahmoudi by the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21. 

According to Mr. Geoffrey Rothman, of DHR, Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired by the Department of 
Transportation as a 5202 Junior Civil Engineer at Step 1 
on March 29, 1994 and worked at Step 1 for the period 
March 29, 1994 through November 17, 1995. According to 
Mr. Rothman, as stated in his attached memorandum of 
July 22, 1998, "At the time of her [Ms. Mahmoudi] offer of 
employment she was informed that she could be 
appointed above the entrance rate of step 1 if she 
provided records documenting that she would experience 
a loss of compensation if she was appointed at step 1. Ms. 
Mahmoudi submitted the required documentation to the 
Department of Transportation to justify an appointment 
to step 5. No action was initiated by the department to 
request approval of the step 5 appointment." 

The annual salary at Step 5 of a 5202 Junior Civil 
Engineer position as of March 29, 1994 when Ms. 
Mahmoudi was hired was $44,970 or $7,882 higher than 
the annual salary of $37,088 at Step 1. On November 18, 
1995, Ms. Mahmoudi was promoted to classification 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer at step 3 and worked at step 3 
for the period November 18, 1995 through August 11, 
1997. If her promotion to the 5204 Assistant Civil 
Engineer position had been based on step 5 of a 5202 
Junior Civil Engineer position, Ms. Mahmoudi would 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



have been promoted to step 4 of the 5204 Assistant Civil 
Engineer position instead of to step 3 of the 5204 
Assistant Civil Engineer position. As of November 18, 
1995, the date of her promotion, the annual salary at step 
4 of a 5204 Assistant Civil Engineer position was $48,598 
or $2,766 higher than the $45,832 annual salary at the 
step 3 salary which Ms. Mahmoudi received. 

Article III.3.G-Appointment Above Entrance Rate of the 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21 states that, "Appointments may be 
made by an appointing officer at any Step in the 
compensation schedule upon the approval of the Human 
Resources Director under one or more of the following 
conditions: a) A former permanent City employee, 
following resignation with service satisfactory, is being 
reappointed to a permanent position in his/her former 
classification, b) loss of compensation would result if 
appointee accepts position at the normal Step, c) a severe, 
easily demonstrated and documented recruiting and 
retention problem exists, d) the appointee possessed 
special experience, qualifications, and/or skills including, 
but not limited to, the number of years performing similar 
work elsewhere which, in the Appointing Officer's opinion, 
warrants appointment above the entrance rate, e) to be 
considered, requests for adjustments under the provisions 
of this Section must be received in the offices of the 
Department of Human Resources not later than the end of 
the fiscal year in which the appointment is made, and f) 
when the Human Resources Director approves 
appointments of all new hires in a classification at a Step 
above the entrance rate, the Human Resource Director 
may advance to that Step incumbents in the same 
classification who are below that Step." 

On behalf of Ms. Mahmoudi. Local 21. AFL-CIO filed a 
grievance against the City in July, 1996 asserting 
violation of Article III.3.G-Appointment Above Entrance 
Rate of the MOU. 

In his July 22, 1998 memorandum, Mr. Rothman stated 
"Ms. Mahmoudi inquired regarding the status of the 
request (to be appointed at a higher step when she was 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

25 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

first hired by the Department of Transportation) shortly 
after she was hired and was provided with inaccurate 
information by a former supervisor that resulted in her 
belief that an adjustment to her salary step was no longer 
possible. However, Ms. Mahmoudi raised the issue again 
a 3 r ear later when she became aware that two new hires in 
the 5202 class were advised that they could be eligible for 
an appointment above the entrance rate. As a 
consequence, Ms. Mahmoudi inquired as to the 
misinformation given to her and again requested her 
appointment retroactively to the higher step. The 
Department then submitted a request to the Department 
of Human Resources, now two years later, for the step 5 
appointment." 

However, Mr. Rothman stated in his memorandum, 
"Requests for appointment above the entrance rate in 
order to be considered must be received either prior to 
appointment or at least within the same fiscal year of 
appointment. Therefore, the request was untimely and 
was denied by the Department of Human Resources." 

However, at this time the Department of Human 
Resources is recommending approval of this subject 
settlement to grant Ms. Mahmoudi a settlement of 
$16,826.50 because, as Mr. Rothman states in his 
memorandum, "In view of the facts and circumstances 
provided by Ms. Mahmoudi and by the union, the 
Department of Human Resources is recommending 
approval of this settlement." 

Comments: 1. The Budget Analyst has found that the original 

calculation of S16.826.50, as determined by the 
Department of Transportation, is in error and that the 
correct amount is $13,936.79. The Department of Human 
Resources and the Department of Transportation are in 
agreement. 

2. Ms. Vicki Clayton of the City Attorney's Office advises 
that if the Board of Supervisors does not approve the 
proposed ordinance, the dispute, would be decided by an 
arbitrator. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

3. According to Ms. Alice Villagomez of DHR. as of the 
writing of this report, the employee and the union are still 
reviewing the Budget Analyst's revised calculation of the 
settlement amount but have not yet reached agreement 
with DHR. As such, DHR and the union representatives 
request that this item be continued to the August 12, 
1998 meeting of the Finance Committee. 

Recommendation: As requested by DHR and the union representatives, 

continue this item to the August 12, 1998 Finance 
Committee meeting. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 4 -File 98-1120 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance Committee at its meeting of July 22, 
1998. 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Department of Human Resources (DHR) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Ordinance authorizing the settlement of a pay grievance 
of Mr. Mark Dorian, filed against the City pursuant to the 
Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO, in the amount of $18,000. 

The proposed ordinance would approve a settlement 
against the City in the amount of $18,000 for a grievance 
filed on behalf of Mr. Mark Dorian by the International 
Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 
21, AFL-CIO. 

According to Mr. James Horan. of the Department of 
Public Works (DPW)> Mr. Dorian is a permanent full time 
5270 Senior Architect. However, Mr. Dorian was assigned 
by the DPW to the position of 5504 Project Manager II on 
June 6, 1988 and worked as a Project Manager from June 
6, 1988 until May 31, 1996. 

On December 4, 1995, the AFL-CIO, Local 21 issued an 
arbitration award with the City pursuant to Article IILA, 
Section 2 (a), paragraph 116 of the FY 1993-94 MOU 
between the Chw and the Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21. This arbitrated agreement increased 
the salaries for the 5270 Senior Architect classification for 
the period of July 1, 1993 through June 30, 1997. For FY 
1993-94, this resulted in an annual salary increase of 
$5,690, from $74,698 to $80,388 at the top step. For FY 
1993-94, the annual salary for a 5504 Project Manager II 
was $74,385. 

On June 14, 1996, Mr. Dorian requested that he be 
reinstated to his permanent class, of 5270 Senior 
Architect, retroactive to July 1, 1993 because the annual 
salary as a 5270 Senior Architect of $80,388 in FY 1993- 
94 was $6,003 higher than the annual salary of a Project 
Manager II of $74,385 in FY 1993-94. DPW reinstated Mr. 
Dorian to a 5270 Senior Architect and resumed Mr. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



?8 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Dorian's pay at the 5270 Senior Architect level as of June 
1, 1996. 

Subsequently, according to Ms. Lucy Palileo of DPW, on 
September 27, 1996 DPW submitted a Problem 
Description Form, on behalf of Mr. Dorian, to the 
Payroll/Personnel Services Division (PPSD), of the 
Controller's Office, requesting retroactive pay for Mr. 
Dorian for the period of July 1, 1993 through May 31, 
1996, pursuant to the arbitrated agreement, because 
DPW stated that Mr. Dorian was still classified as a 5270 
Senior Architect, while assigned to and performing the 
duties of a Project Manager II, during this period of time. 
The Controller's PPSD denied the retroactive pay for Mr. 
Dorian based on the Department of Human Resource's 
recommendation. 

Attachment I is a memorandum, dated June 25, 1997 
from DHR to DPW explaining why the retroactive pay 
request was denied to Mr. Dorian. There are two ways for 
the Department to hire a Project Manager: (1) an 
employee can be appointed Temporary Exempt to the 
Project Manager classification, in which case, the 
employee is unrepresented since Project Managers are not 
presently represented by a union, or (2) an employee can 
be assigned to the position of Project Manager and remain 
represented by the union (Local 21) that represents the 
employees permanent position. According to the DHR 
memorandum, DHR denied Mr. Dorian's request stating. 
"Based on verification provided by the department that 
Mr. Dorian was appointed Temporary Exempt to Class 
5504 Project Manager II, performing the duties and 
responsibilities of a project manager beginning in 1988 
through June of 1996. and the fact that he continued to 
receive the appropriate rate of pay of class 5504 Project 
Manager II during that period of time, the Employee 
Relations Division can only conclude that Mr. Dorian is 
not entitled to the Architects Arbitrator's Award which 
affects covered Architect classes represented by IFPTE, 
Local 21. Project Manager Classifications' rates of pay 
and benefits are governed by the Unrepresented 
Employees Ordinance." 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



Subsequently, Mr. Dorian filed a grievance to receive a 
salary adjustment for the period July 1, 1993 through 
June 30, 1996 in the amount of $18,277. The proposed 
ordinance would authorize a settlement in the amount of 
$18,000 of this pay grievance for Mr. Dorian, or $277 less 
than his request of $18,277. 

1. Subsequent to the DHR memorandum of June 25, 1997 
when DHR concluded that Mr. Dorian was "not entitled" 
to retroactive pay, Mr. Geoffrey Rothman, of DHR, states 
in his memorandum of July 22, 1998, as shown in 
Attachment II, " Given the apparent negative impact on 
the salary relationship between the Senior Architect and 
Project Manager rates of pay, and the need to have 
updated Mr. Dorian's pay records to correctly reflect his 
status as a permanent class 5270 Senior Architect 
receiving assignment pay as a project manager which 
would have otherwise deemed him eligible for the back 
pay pursuant to the December 4, 1995 award, the 
Department of Human Resources is recommending this 
settlement on behalf of the Department of Public Works." 



Recommendation: 



2. Ms. Vicki Clayton of the City Attorney's Office advises 
that if the Board of Supervisors does not approve the 
proposed ordinance, it is likely that the dispute would be 
decided by an arbitrator. 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy decision for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



5 jUL 15 '93 11: 16AM DPW PZESOHNEL Sr AT" ' ••■-_- j 

Fane l of 2 
City and County of San Francisco tSU^i Department of Human Resources 




MDP.U, P. GOUROINS 
HJNIA.N RESOURCES DIRECTOR 



June 25. 1997 

Mr. James P. Horan 

Senior Departmental Personnel Officer 

Department of Public Works 

875 Stevenson Street, Suite 470 

San Francisco, CA 94103 

RE; MARK DORIAN - 5270 Sepjr.r Architect / 5504 Project Manager U 

Dear Mr. Horan: 

This is in response to your request for interpretation and clarification regarding the denial 
of the terms of the Arbitrator's Award dated December 4, 1995 regarding the compensation of 
.Architects as it applies to the appointment history of Mark Dorian. Staff has concluded that Mr. 
Dorian is not covered by this award and is not entitled to retroactive payment (7/1/93 thru 
5/31/96) in the amount of approximately Si S, 000. 00. The determination is based on the 
following facts: 

Staff reviewed and analyzed the employment and appointment history of Mark Dorian 
from June 1983 through the present time. Mr. Dorian was appointed Temporary Exempt to class 
5504 Project Manager II while on leave of absence from his Permanent class 5270 Senior 
.Architect in June of 1988. The position of a project manager requires managing one or more 
large complex capital projects through the integration of several engineering disciplines, multi- 
year planning and financial management skills. 

Staff has determined that Mr. Dorian was compensated at the appropriate rate of pay for 
pcrforming project management duties at the level of 5504 Project Manager II in accordance 
with the Unrepresented Employees Ordinance and in accordance with the Pay Calculation " 
Instruction: Project Manager Classification Scries Memo issued by the Employee Relations 
Division, January 10, 1996. This memo clarified the method and process by which wages are 
calculated for employees in the Project Management Classification series. Therefore, Mr. Dorian 
is not entitled to benefit from the Architects Arbitrator's Award since his duties and 
responsibilities as well as his compensanon for such were those of class 5504 Project Manager II, 
not 5270 Senior Architect. 

Based on verification provided by the department that Mr. Dorian was appointed 
Temporary Exempt to Class 5504 Project Manager II, performing the duties and responsibilities 
of a project manager beginning in 1988 through June of 1996, and the fact that he continued to 
receive the appropriate rate of pay of class 5504 Project Manager U during that period of time, 
the Employee Relations Division can only conclude that Mr. Dorian is not entitled to the 



44 Gough St.-ee*. • San Francisco, CA 94105-1133 



31 



JUL Id '3d 11 :16PM DPW PERSONNEL S~ CA ATTACHMEK 



Paee 2 or Z 



Letter to James P. Horart 
June 25, 1997 
Page 2 of 2 



Architects Arbitrator's Award which affects covered Architect classes represented by IFPTE, 
Local 21. Project Manager Classifications' rates of pay and benefits are governed by the 
Unrepresented Employees Ordinance. 

If you have any questions, concerns or need further guidance regarding this matter please 
contact the Compensation Unit at 557-4990. 



yesy truly yours, 

Janet Bosnich-Seijas 
Compensation Manager 
Employee Relations Division 



JBS/CVD/vd 



c: Tammy Wong, Senior Personnel Analyst, DPW 

Bette Thomas, Principal Personnel Analyst, DHR-OPS/Team3 

PPSD/Controller's Office 

File 



32 



ATTACHMENT II 
fcity and County of San Francisco ^T^ '-, Department of Human Resources 




ANDREA R, GOURDJNE 
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR 

July 22, 1998 

To: Harvey Rose 

Board of Supervisors' Budget Analyst 

From: Geoffrey Rothman ^ '^ 
Employee Relations Director 

Pe: Mark Dorian Settlement 
File No. 98-1120 

Mark Dorian, a permanent class 5270 Senior Architect accepted a position as a class 
5504 Project Manager or. June 6, 1988. Under the provisions of the MOU between the 
City and IFPTE, Local 21, permanent employees in represented classes can be assigned 
to project manager positions and continue to be covered under the provisions of the 
MOU. Acceptance of a project manager assigximenl'appointment generally represents an 
increase in pay. 

The 1993-94 and 1994-95 MOUs between the City and Local 21 contained a provision to 
address a dispute over the union's proposal to grant wage parity between the architect and 
engineering classifications. Tne MOUs further provided for any disputes over wage 
adjustments to be decided by an arbitrator. Tne matter was heard and a decision rendered 
in December, 1995 awarding wage oarirv for the architects retroactive to July 1, 1993. 

In October, 1996, the Department of Public Works, on behalf of Mr. Dorian, submitted a 
request to the Department of Human Resources to retroactively remove Mr. Dorian from 
his project manager position. Tne Department of Human Resources denied this request 

Based on the payroll records that reflected Mr. Dorian's status to be that of a Class 5504 
Project Manager, the Department of Human Resources confirmed its denial by letter of 
June 25, 1997. 

As a consequence of this denial, the union filed a grievance on behalf of Mr. Dorian 
claiming that he was due the back pay granted to other architects. 

Given the apparent negative impact on the saiary relationship between the Senior 
.Architect and Project Manager rates of pay, and the need to have updated .Mr. Dorian's 
pay records to correctly reflect his status as a permanent class 5270 Senior .Architect 
receiving assignment pay as a project manager which would have otherwise deemed him 
eligible for the back pay pursuant to the December 4, 1995 award, the Department of 
Human Resources is recommendins this settlement on behalf of the Department of Public 
Works. 

cc: Jim Horan 



t70/20-d 19fr02S2S 01 SIS* 1SS SIf 



*A Gough Street ■ San Francisco, CA d4103-i;23 

Ud SI =S BS.EZ "in 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 5 - File 98-59 

Department: Police Department 

Item: Resolution authorizing a $1 fee to be paid at the time of 

vehicle registration, renewal, or supplemental 
application for apportioned registration, for vehicles 
registered to owners with a San Francisco address. Such 
fees collected are to be used exclusively to fund Police 
programs related to fingerprint identification of persons 
committing crimes while operating motor vehicles. 

Description: Section 9250.19 of the State Vehicle Code, added in 

January of 1998, authorizes County Boards of 
Supervisors, by resolution, to impose a fee of $1 to be 
paid at time of registration, renewal, or supplemental 
application for apportioned registration 1 pursuant to 
Article 4 of Chapter 4 on every vehicle registered to an 
address within the county, except those expressly 
exempted from payment of registration, such as 
government agency-owned vehicles. The fees collected 
under this provision can be expended only to fund 
programs which enhance the capacity of local law 
enforcement agencies to provide automated mobile and 
fixed location fingerprint identification 2 of individuals 
involved in crimes committed while operating a motor 
vehicle. 

According to Inspector Michael Gaynor of the Crime 
Scene Investigations Unit, the Police Department, in 
conjunction with the Sheriffs Department, operates an 
automated fingerprint identification system and desires 
to enhance and expand the system as follows: (1) 
upgrade the existing Automated Fingerprint 
Identification System (AFIS); (2) place fingerprinting 
scanners in the San Francisco Unified School District 
Office and public agencies throughout the City for 
purposes of criminal history background checks 



1 Apportioned registration is the registration of commercial vehicles in California which are 
used in part to travel to jurisdictions outside the State. Fees are collected in California and 
remitted to states on the basis of miles traveled within each of those states. 

2 Automated mobile and fbced location fingerprint identification allows police officers to 
identify individuals with fingerprint machines at various locations throughout the City or in 
the field with hand held fingerprint identification devices. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

involving employment; and (3) provide officers in the 
field with hand held fingerprint identification devices. 
The Police Department desires to fund such 
enhancements and expansion using funds which would 
be received by this proposed subject $1 fee and any 
additional funds needed for the enhancements and 
expansion would be paid for by the current balance and 
monies deposited annually in the Police Department's 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund (AFIF), 
included in Administrative Code Section 10.117-108, in 
accordance with Ordinance 104-91 approved by the 
Board of Supervisors in March of 1991. According to 
Officer Thomas Strong of the Police Department, the 
monies deposited to the AFIF are from fines, penalties, 
and forfeitures imposed and collected by the courts for 
criminal offenses. 

According to the proposed legislation, "this fee shall be 
in effect until January 1, 2003, unless a later enacted 
statute deletes or extends this date." 

Comments: 1 According to the State Department of Motor Vehicles, 

as of December 31, 1997, 418,510 vehicles are registered 
annually to owners with a San Francisco address. 
Therefore, approval of this proposed resolution would 
result in increased annual revenues of an estimated 
S418.510 in registration fees which would be used by the 
Police Department for the enhancement and expansion 
of the fingerprint identification system. 

2. Attachment I provided by Inspector Gaynor describes 
the proposed enhancements and expansion of the Police 
Department's fingerprint identification system. 

3. According to Inspector Gaynor, the estimated effective 
date, authorizing the SI fee to be collected, is January of 
1999. As previously noted, the fee would be in effect 
until January 1, 2003, unless deleted or extended by 
subsequent legislation. However, Inspector Gaynor 
states that the Police Department will apply for a grant 
of $418,510 from the State Department of Motor 
Vehicles, to replace fees not collected in FY 1998-99. 
Attachment II provided by Inspector Gaynor is a 
preliminary five-year budget for expending $7,567,000, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

to enhance and expand the Police Department's 
Automated Fingerprint Identification System. Revenue 
to support such expenditures would include a total of 
$2,092,550 in new fee revenue if this legislation is 
approved (an estimated $418,510 in fees each year for 
four years and $418,510 in one-time only grant funds) 
and $5,474,450 from the Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund (AFIF) - Fund Balance and regular 
revenues accruing to the Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund over the five year budget period. 

4. Officer Strong reports that the Police Department 
intends to use the existing Automated Fingerprint 
Identification Fund as the depository for the fees 
collected under this proposed legislation. In accordance 
with Administrative Code Section 10.117-108, the 
expenditures of monies from this Fund are subject to 
appropriation approval by the Board of Supervisors. 

5. According to Mr. Harold Guetersloh of the 
Controller's Office, the current unappropriated AFIF 
Fund Balance is $4,300,000. Regular annual revenues to 
the AFIF are approximately $950,000 in an average 
year, while operating expenditures (for AFIS 
maintenance, materials and supplies, training and 
routine equipment replacement) are currently $507,000 
in FY 1998-99. The Budget Analyst estimates that, if 
the proposed new $1 fee is approved, the AFIF would be 
able to fund existing operating expenditures, the 
$7,567,000 AFIS upgrade and retain a Fund Balance of 
approximately $825,000 at the end of the five year 
period beginning with Fiscal Year 1998-99 and ending 
Fiscal Year 2002-2003. Without the proposed fee 
increase, the AFIF would only support a maximum of 
approximately $6,000,000 in AFIS upgrade 
expenditures and would fully deplete its current Fund 
Balance within four Fiscal Years. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter 
for the Board of Supervisors. 






BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



FRO!/ SFPD/CS1 (WED) ■ )32 P 2 

Attachment I 
I Page 1 of 2 



Budget Details 

Fiscal vear 1998/1999 

In this fiscal year the projected revenue is 5418,00, minus administrative costs which are 
projected to be 519,000. This revenue wculd be for the calendar year of 1998, from 
which the money would be acquired from the State transportation fund. For the first half 
of the calendar year of 1999, the projects i revenue would be $200,000. The anticipated 
areas of expenditure of these funds are as follows: 

A. 5250,000 would be used to purchase equipment and set up the applicant 
fingerprinting program. The CDSt of the live scan machines for fingerprinting. 
the store and forward, printers, the network equipment, and the network 
installation would be 5240,000. The cost of software development and 
installation so the applicant program can be monitored will be SI 0,000. 

B. The remaining amount of SB720 funds will be used to partially pay for the 
S2.3 million dollar upgrade to the fingerprint computer system (APIS) which 
is scheduled to be installed by June, 1999. This upgrade will improve the 
accuracy of the system and increase the identification rate. The balance of the 
upgrade will be funded by the Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund. 

Fiscal Year 1999/2000 

The projected revenue for tins year will b; S41 S,000. The anticipated areas of 
expenditure of these funds are as follows: 

I 

A. There is a planned purchase of 30 RAPID (Remote Access Positive ID) 

devices in this fiscal year. These are mobile fingerprint identification devices 
which will be used in the field by officers. The cos: of this equipment 
purchase will be 51,140,000. The entire 5418,000 will be used to assist in 
funding this purchase while th; balance will come from the Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund. 

B. The Automated Fingerprint Identification will be used to fund an archive 
system at a cost of 5300,000. 

Fiscil Year 2000/2001 

The projected revenue for this year will b>; $418,000. The anticipated areas of 
expenditure of these funds are as follows: 



37 



FROM SFPB/CS! 



(WED) 7. 25' 92 6: 29/ST. 6 : 28/NO. 4260921032 P 3 



Attachm ent I 
?aee 2 



or I 



A. I am projecting that an additional live scan machine [will be needed for the 

applicant program along withprinler at a cost of $75,000. 
3. Twenty-five more RAPID devices will be purchased this year at a cost of 

5400,000. The remaining balance would be funded by the Automated 

Fingerprint Identification Fund-. 
C. The Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund will fund an expansion to the 

'archive system at a cost of $500,000. 

Fiscal Year 2001/2002 

The projected revenue for this year will be $41 8,000. Tne anticipated areas of 
expenditure of these funds are as follows: 

-A Another 35 RAPID units will be purchased at an anticipated cost of 
$1,200,000. The remaining balance will be funded by the Automated 
Fingerprint Id entification Fun i j 



Fiscal Year 2002/200: 



The projected revenue for this year will be 5418,000. Tne anticipated areas of 
expenditure of these funds are as follows: 

A. Three more live scan machines will be purchased with printers. The 
anticipated cost will be 5225,000. 

B. Ten RAPID units will be purchased at a cost of S150.000. 

C. A palm print computer system for identification of palm prints from crime 
scenes will be purchased at an anticipated cost of 51,000,000. The Automated 
Fingerprint Identification Fund will fund this entirely. 



Please note that the costs for the RAPID units vary because some of the purchases require 
additional hardware, which are not required in each purchase. Additionally, the 
Automated Fingerprint Identification Fund is used to pay for other items such as 
maintenance on equipment, supplies for the equipment, fingerprint processing equipment 
and supplies, and network maintenance. I didn't list those costs, as they are too 
numerous. I listed the major purchases which are planned. 



38 



■ROM SF1 



[THU! 7. 30'98 13:30/ST. 13:; ','l ? 2 

Budget Detail* '.achment II 



Fiscul Year 1996/1999 



Item 



Live Scan machines equipment 
and installation 



State DMV Admin cost 



1 Cost Of ltStT-S 

~T~ 19,000.00 | S 

I 
$ 250,000.00 I S 



SI fees distnbunon Balance funded by Automated 
Fingerprint ID Fund (AFIS) 



19,000.00 



250,000.00 



AFIS Upgraded 



S 2,300,000.00 i S 



149,510.00 I $ 



Subtotal (imi \m) 



2,150,490.00 



$ 2.569.0C0.Mi i S 4l8,5lG.oO , 5, 



2,150,450.00 



Items 



Admin Cost 



Fisca, Year 1999/2000 



Cosi of items SI fee:, distribution Balance funded by Automated 

, Fingerprint ID Fund (AFIS) 



2.000.00 S 



1.000.00 



30 - Remote Access Posirive ID 
Devices (RAPID) 



1,140,000.00 , S 



H6.510.00 S 



723,490 00 



APIS - Archive system 



$ 300,00100 



300,000.00 



Subtotal (1999/2000) 



S 1,442,003.00 I $ 418,510 00 S 



1,023,490.00 



Fiscal Year 2000/2001 



Items 



jCost of item:; SI fees distnbunon Balance funded by Automated 

Fingerprint ID Fund (AFIS) 



Admin cost 



Live Scan Machine w/Pnnter 



2,0O ).00 $ 
757)00.00 i*S 



',000.00 



75,000.00 



25 - Remote Access Positive ID 
(RAPID) 



AFIS - Archive svstem 



S 400.000.00 : $ 3 41,51000 S 

s soojboo.oo . $ 



58,490.00 



500,000.00 



Subtotal (2000/2001) 



S 977,000.00 S 418,510.00 S 



558,490.00 



Fiscal Year 2001/2002 



Items 



Admin cost 



, Cost of items :S1 fees distribution Balance funded by Automated 

Fingerprint ID Fund (AFIS) 



2,000.00 S 



2,000.00 



35 - Remote Access Positive ED 
(RAPED) 



! $ 1,200,000.00 $ 416,510.00 S 



783,490.00 



Subtotal (2001/2002) 



S 1.202.00C 00 S 



418,510.00 S 



783.490.00 



Fiscal Year 2002/2001 



Items 



Cost of items l$] fees distnbunon Beiance funded by Automated 

Fingerprint ID Fund (AFIS) 



Admin cost 



Live Scan Machine w/Printer 



2,000.00 . S 



2,000.00 



225.000.00 S 



225,000.00 



10 - Remote Access Positive ID 
(RAPED) 



150.000.00 S 



Palm pnnt computer system 



S 1,000,000.00 i S 



150,000.00 
41,510 OO" $ 



958.490.00 



Subtotal (2002/2003) 



$ 1,377,000.00 $ 418,510.00 S 



958,490.00 



Grandtotal 



S 7,567,000.00 ' S 2,092,550.00 S 



5.474,450.00 



7/30/98 



39 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 6 - File 98-1254 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Water Department 

Resolution authorizing the PUC to prepare and solicit 
invitations to bid and/or hold a public auction for the sale 
of the Bernal Property located in Alameda County, subject 
to the subsequent review and approval b3^ the Board of 
Supervisors, by resolution, and Mayor, of any final sale of 
the property. 

The "Bernal Property" is approximately 510 acres of 
unimproved land, owned by the Water Department. The 
property is located primarily in an unincorporated area of 
Alameda County, immediately adjacent to the City of 
Pleasanton. Approval of the proposed resolution would 
direct and authorize the General Manager of the PUC to 
solicit Invitations to Bid and/or hold a public auction for 
the sale of the Bernal Property to the highest responsible 
bidder. Actual sale of the property would be subject to 
separate approval of the Board of Supervisors, by 
resolution. 

Mr. Rick Nelson, the PUC's Project Manager for the 
Bernal Property, advises that the PUC has been working 
with Alameda County since 1988 and the City of 
Pleasanton since 1994 to obtain development rights 
(known as "land use entitlements") to build a mixed-use 
development on the Bernal Property. The City could then 
either sell the property outright or partner with a private 
developer and share in the risk and profits. 

Mr. Nelson reports that the planned mixed-use 
development currently being negotiated by the City of 
Pleasanton would consist of up to 1,900 residential 
housing units and 750,000 square feet of commercial 
space which would be annexed into the City of Pleasanton 
if all the contemplated development approvals are 
obtained. In all, according to Mr. Nelson, of the 510 total 
acres, approximately half would be developed and half 
would be devoted to roadways, a golf course, public parks 
and other public/open space uses. According to Mr. 
Nelson, the PUC has secured all the necessary approvals 
for the development of the Bernal Property from Alameda 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

40 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



County. However, the City has not yet reached final 
agreement with the City of Pleasanton, according to Mr. 
Nelson. 

The proposed resolution would authorize the PUC several 
different options for the sale of the property, to issue an 
Invitation to Bid, hold a public auction, or, if necessary, 
hold a public auction subsequent to issuing an Invitation 
to Bid. Mr. Nelson advises that the PUC plans to issue an 
Invitation to Bid in late August containing two separate 
options for interested developers to bid on: (1) to purchase 
the Bernal Property "as-is," without full land use 
entitlements from the City of Pleasanton in place, leaving 
the developer to negotiate the additional entitlements 
with the City of Pleasanton or (2) to purchase the 
property with the full land use entitlements to develop 
the property, which are currently being negotiated 
between the City of San Francisco and the City of 
Pleasanton. 

According to Mr. Nelson, providing developers with two 
bid options will allow the City to test the market and 
obtain the highest price by either selling the property as- 
is or selling the property after San Francisco has received 
the full land use entitlements from the City of Pleasanton. 
According to Mr. Charles Sullivan of the City Attorney's 
Office, the idea behind this approach is that some 
developers may wish to negotiate a slightly different 
development agreement with Alameda County and the 
City of Pleasanton and thus may be more interested in 
purchasing the property without the land use 
entitlements which San Francisco is presently 
negotiating to obtain. 

Mr. Nelson advises that the PUC has made no policy 
decisions at this time as to whether or not the City should 
sell the property. Mr. Nelson reports that if the bids 
received for the Bernal Property are unsatisfactory, the 
City may elect not to sell the property and instead pursue 
other options, such as partnering with a private 
developer. In any event, the sale of the property would be 
subject to subsequent approval by the Board of 
Supervisors by resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

41 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 6 - File 98-1254 
Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Public Library,Gov't Info. Ctr., 5 th Fir 

Documents dept. 
AUG 4 1998 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Water Department 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Resolution authorizing the PUC to prepare and solicit 
invitations to bid and/or hold a public auction for the sale 
of the Bernal Property located in Alameda County, subject 
to the subsequent review and approval by the Board of 
Supervisors, by resolution, and Mayor, of any final sale of 
the property. 

The "Bernal Property" is approximately 510 acres of 
unimproved land, owned by the Water Department. The 
property is located primarily in an unincorporated area of 
Alameda County, immediately adjacent to the City of 
Pleasanton. Approval of the proposed resolution would 
direct and authorize the General Manager of the PUC to 
solicit Invitations to Bid and/or hold a public auction for 
the sale of the Bernal Property to the highest responsible 
bidder. Actual sale of the property would be subject to 
separate approval of the Board of Supervisors, by 
resolution. 

Mr. Rick Nelson, the PUC's Project Manager for the 
Bernal Property, advises that the PUC has been working 
with Alameda County since 1994 and the City of 
Pleasanton since 1988 to obtain development rights 
(known as "land use entitlements") to build a mixed-use 
development on the Bernal Property. The City could then 
either sell the property outright or partner with a private 
developer and share in the risk and profits. 

Mr. Nelson reports that the planned mixed-use 
development currently being negotiated by the City of 
Pleasanton would consist of up to 1,900 residential 
housing units and 750,000 square feet of commercial 
space which would be annexed into the City of Pleasanton 
if all the contemplated development approvals are 
obtained. In all, according to Mr. Nelson, of the 510 total 
acres, approximately half would be developed and half 
would be devoted to roadways, a golf course, public parks 
and other public/open space uses. According to Mr. 
Nelson, the PUC has secured all the necessary approvals 
for the development of the Bernal Property from Alameda 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

40 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting Revised 8/3/98 

County. However, the City has not yet reached final 
agreement with the City of Pleasanton, according to Mr. 
Nelson. 

The proposed resolution would authorize the PUC several 
different options for the sale of the property, to issue an 
Invitation to Bid, hold a public auction, or, if necessary, 
hold a public auction subsequent to issuing an Invitation 
to Bid. Mr. Nelson advises that the PUC plans to issue an 
Invitation to Bid in late August containing two separate 
options for interested developers to bid on: (1) to purchase 
the Bernal Property "as-is," without full land use 
entitlements from the City of Pleasanton in place, leaving 
the developer to negotiate the additional entitlements 
with the City of Pleasanton or (2) to purchase the 
property with the full land use entitlements to develop 
the property, which are currently being negotiated 
between the City of San Francisco and the City of 
Pleasanton. 

According to Mr. Nelson, providing developers with two 
bid options will allow the City to test the market and 
obtain the highest price by either selling the property as- 
is or selling the property after San Francisco has received 
the full land use entitlements from the City of Pleasanton. 
According to Mr. Charles Sullivan of the City Attorney's 
Office, the idea behind this approach is that some 
developers may wish to negotiate a slightly different 
development agreement with the City of Pleasanton and 
thus may be more interested in purchasing the property 
without the land use entitlements which San Francisco is 
presently negotiating to obtain. 

Mr. Nelson advises that the PUC has made no policy 
decisions at this time as to whether or not the City should 
sell the property. Mr. Nelson reports that if the bids 
received for the Bernal Property are unsatisfactory, the 
City may elect not to sell the property and instead pursue 
other options, such as partnering with a private 
developer. In any event, the sale of the property would be 
subject to subsequent approval by the Board of 
Supervisors by resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

41 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Comments: 1. Under Section 23.1 of the Administrative Code, the 

Director of Property is responsible for the sale of any City 
property and assumes jurisdiction over such property, at 
the recommendation of the department responsible for the 
administration of the property and the approval of the 
Board of Supervisors. However, Mr. Nelson advises that 
due to the unique nature of the Bernal Property, the 
complicated issues involved in a sale of the property, and 
the continuing work to seek certain land use entitlements 
from the City of Pleasanton, the proposed resolution 
would authorize the General Manager of the PUC to 
solicit invitations to bid and/or hold a public auction for 
the sale of the property, with the PUC, instead of the 
Director of Real Estate, continuing to have jurisdiction 
over the property. 

2. According to the proposed resolution, the City cannot 
enter into or be bound into any agreement to sell the 
Bernal Property until any and all environmental review 
required by CEQA is completed and all required City 
approvals based on such environmental review and public 
review have been obtained. Since the proposed resolution 
authorizes only an Invitation to Bid and/or public auction 
of the property, Mr. Sullivan advises that the passage of 
the subject resolution does not require environmental 
review under the California Environmental Quality Act 
(CEQA). 

3. In a June 1994 management audit report of the Water 
Department, the Budget Analyst reported with regard to 
the subject property that the real estate development 
project was "...estimated to have a long term net revenue 
benefit to the City of S3 19 million." However, Mr. Nelson 
cautions that this estimate was based upon a financial 
subconsultant's report which rested on a number of 
specific assumptions that may no longer be applicable and 
may or may not have any relevance to today's market. 

Mr. Jim Musbach of Economic Planning Systems (EPS), 
the financial subconsultant that provided the report upon 
which the estimate was based, states that the $319 
million did not reflect the market value of the property, 
but rather the total amount of a long-term revenue 
stream to the City if it were to act as the sole developer of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

42 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



the property. In addition, Mr. Musbach reports that the 
estimate did not include an adjustment to reflect the 
additional risks associated with the City acting as a 
developer or any possible profit-sharing requirement if 
the City were to enter into a joint venture for the 
development. Finally, according to Mr. Musbach, the 
estimate was based upon a conceptual project which is 
much different from the project currently under 
consideration. According to Mr. Musbach, differences 
include the number and mix of units, the rate of 
development, and the infrastructure and construction 
costs and requirements. 

Mr. Nelson advises that a more current appraisal of the 
potential value of the Bernal Property is not available at 

this time. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

A3 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 7 - File 98-664 



Note: The Department of Elections advises that an Amendment of 

the Whole of the proposed ordinance will be introduced at the 
August 5, 1998 Finance Committee meeting. This report is 
based on the Amendment of the Whole. 

Department: Department of Elections 

Item: Ordinance amending the San Francisco Municipal Elections 

Code to amend Sections 830 and 840 to: 1) reduce the fee for 
publication of ballot arguments in the Voter Information 
Pamphlet from $200 plus $3.00 per word to $200 plus $2.00 
per word; and 2) increase the value of signatures submitted 
in lieu of fees from $0.25 per signature to $0.50 per 
signature. 

Description: In November of 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted a 

consolidated Municipal Elections Code as required by the 
1996 City Charter. 1 Two sections of the Municipal Elections 
Code cover the fees charged to place ballot arguments in the 
Voter Information Pamphlet, which each registered voter 
receives prior to City elections: 1) Section 830 increased the 
fee to publish a paid 2 argument from $200 and $2 per word to 
$200 and $3 per word; and 2) Section 840 decreased the 
value of signatures submitted to the Department of Elections 
in lieu of the payment of fees from $0.50 to $0.25. According 
to Ms. Naomi Nishioka of the Department of Elections, each 
valid signature collected by ballot argument proponents 
reduces the fee by $0.25. If a ballot argument proponent 
collects enough signatures, the fee can be eliminated 
entirely. For example, the cost to submit a 100-word ballot 
argument is currently $500, or $200 plus $3 per word for 100 
words. If a ballot argument proponent collected 2,000 
signatures, the fee would be reduced by $500, or $0.25 per 
signature for 2,000 signatures, and thereby eliminated. 



1 Prior to June of 1996, rules and procedures for municipal elections were contained in certain 
sections of both the pre-1996 City Charter and the Administrative Code. 

2 Official proponents and opponents of ballot measures do not have to pay for their arguments in the 
Voter Information Pamphlet. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

The above-noted fee increases in these two Sections of the 
Municipal Elections Code took effect on January 1, 1998, and 
were implemented in the June, 1998 election. 

According to Ms. Nishioka, several members of the public 
objected to these fee increases. In response to these 
objections, the sponsor of the ordinance has proposed that the 
existing fees be reduced, resulting in a decrease for ballot 
arguments from $200 and $3 per word to $200 and $2 per 
word. This ordinance would also increase the value of the 
signatures submitted to the Department of Elections in lieu 
of the payment of fees from $0.25 per signature to $0.50 per 
signature. This change in the value of signatures would also 
have the effect of reducing the fees collected by the 
Department for ballot arguments in the Voter Information 
Pamphlet. Based on these fee reductions, a ballot argument 
proponent could submit a 150-word ballot argument at a cost 
of $500, or $200 plus S2 per word for 150 words. To 
eliminate this $500 fee, a ballot argument proponent would 
need to collect 1,000 signatures at $0.50 per signature. 

Comments: 1. The FY 1998-99 budget for the Department of Elections is 

$2,856,565. This total Departmental budget includes 
$325,800 for the November. 1998 Voter Information 
Pamphlet, according to Mr. Art Pose of the Department of 
Elections. 

The Department's FY 1998-99 budget is funded by the 
following revenue sources: 

Tvpe Amount 

General Fund Support $2,498,255 

Departmental Revenue 321,645 

Interdepartmental Recoveries 36.665 

TOTAL $2,856,565 

According to Mr. Pose, the Department's budget includes 
$31,620 in fee revenue for ballot arguments in the Voter 
Information Pamphlet for the November, 1998 election, 
which is the only election scheduled for FY 1998-99. 

2. The Amendment of the Whole indicates that the proposed 
fee reductions will take effect on January 1, 1999. The 
existing, higher fees will therefore remain in effect for the 
November. 1998 election. Since this is the only election 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 5, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Recommendation: 



scheduled for FY 1998-99, there will be no reduction in 
estimated fee revenues during FY 1998-99. 

3. Based on the January 1, 1999 effective date of the 
proposed ordinance, the first election affected by the fee 
reductions would be the November, 1999 election. The fiscal 
impact of the proposed fee reductions on the Department's 
budget for FY 1999-2000 and in future years would depend 
on the number of elections that are held and the number of 
ballot arguments and the related number of words contained 
in the Voter Information Pamphlet for each election. As an 
example of the potential fiscal impact of the proposed fee 
reductions, Ms. Nishioka reports that if the lower fees had 
been in effect during the June 2, 1998 election, the 
Department would have collected $106,753, or 

approximately $18,000 less in fee revenues than the 
$124,753 actually collected based on the existing, higher fees. 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for the 
Board of Supervisors. 




Harvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



] D. ^S 



&/w 



^FINANCE COMMITTEE 

..BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND COUNTY OF .SAN FRANCISCO 

REGULAR MEETING 



DOCUMENTS DF.PT. 

AUG 1 3 1998 

o AN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



WEDNESDAY. AUGUST 12. 1998 - 1;00 P.M. 



VETERANS BUILDING 
4 01 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 



MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

ABSENT: Supervisor Teng for entire meeting. 

Meeting Commenced: 1:00 p.m. 



REGULAR CALENDAR 

File 98-1251 . [Zoo General Obligation Bond Issuance] Resolution 
providing for the issuance of not to exceed $48,000,000 
aggregate principal amount of City and County of San Francisco 
General Obligation Bonds (Zoo Facilities Bonds, 1997) , including 
the issuance of an initial series thereof in the aggregate 
principal amount of not to exceed $11,000,000 and designated as 
the City and County of San Francisco General Obligation Bonds 
(Zoo Facilities Bonds, 1997), Series 1998D; authorizing the 
execution, authentif ication and registration of said Bonds; 
providing for the levy of a tax to pay the principal and 
interest thereof; providing for the appointment of depositories 
and other agent for said Bonds; providing for the establishment 
of accouts related thereto; ratifying certain actions previously 
taken; and granting general authority to City officials to take 
necessary actions in connection with the authorization, 
issuance, sale and delivery of said Bonds; companion measure to 
File 98-1952 (Also File 170-97-9) . (Mayor) 



SPEAKERS: 



ACTION : 



Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; David Anderson, S.F. 
Director - support. 

Hearing held. Recommended. 



Zoo 



File 98-1252 . [Zoo General Obligation Bond Sale] Resolution 
authorizing and directing the sale of not to exceed $11,000,000 
City and County of San Francisco General Obligation Bonds (Zoo 
Facilities Bonds, 1997) , Series 1998D; prescribing the form and 
terms of said Bonds; authorizing the execution, authentication 
and registration of said Bonds; providing for the appointment of 
depositories and other agents for said Bonds; providing for the 
establishment of accounts related thereto; approving the forms 
of official notice of sale of Bonds and notice of intention to 
sell Bonds; directing the publication of official notice of sale 
and notice of intention to sell Bonds; approving the form and 
excution of the official statement relating thereto; approving 
the form of the continuing disclosure certificate; approving 
modification to documents; ratifying certain actions previously 
taken; and granting general authority to City officials to take 
necessary actions in connection with the authorization, 
issuance, sale and delivery of said Bonds; companion measure to 
File 98-1251. (Also see File 170-97-9). (Mayor) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; David Anderson, S.F. Zoo 
Director - support. 



ACTION: 



Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-1291 . [Appropriation, Recreation and Park Department] 
Ordinance appropriating $1,000,000, Recreation and Park 
Department, of Culture and Recreation Special Fund Revenue 
balance for the dredging project - Marina Yacht Harbor, for 
fiscal year 1998-1999. RO #98010. (Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr.) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Ernie Prindle, Recreation 
& Park Dept. - support; Michael Morlin, Recreation & 
Park Dept. - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on lines 1, 11, 15 and 17 to 
replace "$1,000,000" with "$426,800". (See new 
title). Recommended as amended. 

New Title: [Appropriation, Recreation and Park 
Department] Ordinance appropriating $426,800, 
Recreation and Park Department, of Culture and 
Recreation Special Fund Revenue balance for the 
dredging project - Marina Yacht Harbor, for fiscal 
year 1998-1999. RO /98010. (Mayor Willie L. Brown, 
Jr.) 



File 98-1279 . [Prop J Contract. Intake/Shelter Services] 
Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification that 
intake and shelter services to status offenders can be 
practically performed by private contractor for lower cost than 
similar work services performed by City and County employees. 
(Juvenile Probation Department) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Lonnie Holmes, Juvenile 
Probation Dept. - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amended on line 6 after "employees" and 
beginning on line 24 after "1998-99" to add "; 
effective retroactive to July 1, 1998.". (See new 
title) . Recommended as amended. 



New Title; [Prop J Contract, Intake/Shelter Services] 
Resolution concurring with the Controller's 
certification that intake and shelter services to 
status offenders can be practically performed by 
private contractor for lower cost than similar work 
services performed by City and County employees; 
retroactive to July 1, 1998. (Juvenile Probation 
Department) 

5. File 98-1236 . [Patient Day Rates, Fiscal Year 1998-99] 
Ordinance amending Health Code by amending Section 128, fixing 
patient rates for services furnished by City and County 
Healthcare institutions; authorizing retroactivity the effective 
date of July 1, 1998. (Department of Public Health) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Monique Zmuda, Dept. of 
Public Health - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

6. File 98-1160 . [Waiver of Fees] Resolution waiving fees to be 
charged for crowd control and re-routing transit lines in 
connection with the Pink Saturday Party on June 27, 1998. 
(Supervisors Leno, Bierman, Katz, Ammiano) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Sister Kitty Catalyst - 
Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

7. File 98-1159. [Recovery of Medical Costs] Resolution 
authorizing the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue to recover the cost 
of medical and dental care provided to persons injured by third 
parties under circumstances creating tort liability, as 
authorized by Government Code Sections 23004.1 through 23004.3, 
and giving the Bureau the authority to compromise, settle or 
waive claims in connection with such recovery. (Supervisor 
Kaufman) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Robert Fletcher, 
Treasurer /Tax Collector - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



VOTE ON ALL ITEMS WAS 2-0. WITH SUPERVISOR TENG ABSENT FOR ENTIR E 
MEETING. 

Meeting Adjourned: 1: 40 p.m. 



Public Library,Gov't Info. Ctr., 5 Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn 



7 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street. Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 



FAX (415) 252-0461 



August 7, 1998 



TO: 
FROM: 



Finance Committee 
-Budget Analyst Ree.a*~\*.>J-**;o«* -kr *><*+. ^t-? 



OCCULTS OEPT. 

AUG 1 1 1998 

SAN FBANG»S<*J 

PUBLIC UBBABV 



SUBJECT: August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Items 1 and 2 - Files 98-1251 and 98-1252 

Department: Mayor's Office of Public Finance 

Items: Item 1, File 98-1251: Resolution providing for the issuance 

of up to $48,000,000 in City and County of San Francisco 
General Obligation Bonds (Zoo Facilities Bonds, 1997), 
including the issuance of an initial series of such bonds of up 
to $11,000,000 (Series 1998D). 

Item 2, File 98-1252: Resolution authorizing and directing 
the sale of up to $11,000,000 in City and County of San 
Francisco General Obligation Bonds (Zoo Facilities Bonds. 
1997) Series 1998D. 

Description: In June of 1997. a total of $48,000,000 in General Obligation 

bonds (Zoo Facilities Bonds, 1997) was approved by the 
electorate to provide funding for acquisition, construction 
and/or reconstruction of facilities at the San Francisco Zoo. 
Under provisions of the bond measure and in the terms of the 
agreement with the City, the Zoological Society, under the 
public/private partnership formed in 1993 to operate the Zoo, 
agreed to raise an additional $25,000,000 in private funds for 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

capital improvements, for a total capital improvement 
program of $73,000,000. 

Item 1, File 98-1251, would provide for the issuance of up to 
$48,000,000 in such General Obligation Bonds (Zoo Facilities 
Bonds, 1997), including the issuance of an initial series of up 
to $11,000,000 (Series 1998D). Item 2, File 98-1252, would 
authorize and direct the sale of the Series 1998D bonds, in 
an amount of up to $11,000,000. 

The proceeds from the sale of $11,000,000 in the proposed 
bond funds include an estimated $10,900,00 for project costs 
and $100,000 for bond issuance costs. Such funds would be 
supplemented with $2,320,000 in private funds, to be raised 
by the Zoological Society, for a total project cost of 
$13,220,000 under this initial bond sale. The Attachment to 
this report, provided by the Zoo, contains a budget for the 
following projects: (1) an Education Center, (2) an Animal 
Resource Center, (3) Zoo support facilities, (4) administrative 
offices, (5) a Public Art Program, and (6) repair and 
replacement of other Zoo buildings and exhibits. 

The general provisions of the sale of the Series 1998D bonds 
(Item 2, File 98-1252), in the amount of up to $11,000,000 for 
the San Francisco Zoo, are as follows: 

• The sale of the bonds is tentatively scheduled to be held 
on October 7, 1998. 

• The bonds would be sold at an interest rate not to exceed 
12 percent per year and will reach final maturity in the 
year 2018, or 20 years. 

• Bonds redeemed by the City after the call protection 
period (8 years) and prior to maturity would be subject to 
redemption prices incorporated in the proposed 
resolution. 

• An official statement describing the bonds to be sold is 
incorporated in the proposed resolution for approval by 
the Board of Supervisors. The official statement would be 
available to all bidders for the bonds. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

• Bonds will be awarded to the bidder whose bid represents 
the lowest true interest cost to the City, in accordance 
with the procedures described in the Notice of Sale. 

• Bids will be received by the Clerk of the Board of 
Supervisors and awarded by the Finance Committee of 
the Board of Supervisors. 

Comments: 1. As stated above, the annual interest rate of Series 1998D 

bonds could not exceed 12 percent. However, Ms. Laura 
Opsahl of the Mayor's Office of Public Finance reports that if 
the bonds are sold in October of 1998, the bonds would 
probably be sold with an overall effective interest rate of 
approximately 5.843 percent, and would have an average 
interest rate of 5.809 percent over the 20-year term of the 
bonds. 

2. Ms. Opsahl estimates that with a 20-year term for the 
Series 1998D bonds, and an expected average interest rate of 
approximately 5.809 percent, the proposed sale of bonds in 
the total amount of $11,000,000 would result in total interest 
costs of approximately 87,996.452 and a total debt service 
requirement of approximately $18,996,452 over the life of the 
bonds. Over the 20-year period, this would result in an 
average debt service requirement of approximately $940,795 
per year. 

3. According to Mr. John Madden of the Controller's Office, 
the proposed Series 1998D bond sale in the amount of 
$11,000,000 would result in an increase in the Property Tax 
rate of approximately $0.0016. At that rate, the owner of a 
single family residence assessed at $400,000 would pay $6.33 
in additional Property Taxes annually due to the issuance of 
these bonds. 

4. The City has a legal debt limit of 3 percent of net assessed 
property value, as provided in Section 9.106 of the City's 
Charter. Under the legal debt limit, the City's General 
Obligation bonding capacity is $1,917,000,000 for FY 1998- 
99. As of July 2, 1998, the amount of the City's outstanding 
General Obligation bonds was $815,035,000. Consequently, 
the City's current available General Obligation bonding 
capacity under the 3 percent legal debt limit is 
approximately $1,101,965,000 ($1,917,000,000 in bonding 
capacity less $815,035,000 in outstanding bonds). 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



5. Ms. Opsahl advises that the estimated bond issuance 
costs for the proposed Series 1998D bonds, including fees for 
bond counsel, financial advisors, and the services of the City 
Attorney's Office, is 5100,000. 

6. All future expenditure appropriations from the sale 
proceeds of the Series 1998D bonds for the improvement 
projects, including the bond issuance costs, would be subject 
to separate appropriation approval by the Board of 
Supervisors. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

4 



EM BY 



-96 ; 2:Q2P\i ; 



MAYOR'S OFF1CE- 



AuguK?. 1998 



Ms. L&ura Opsahl 

Debt Administrator 

Mayor's Office of Fimuice & Lecislanve Affairs 

City & County of San Francisco 

401 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 304 

San Francisco. CA 94102 




Attachment 



REVISED 



RE: Additional Data — Public Infonnatioil Worksheet 

Phase II Master Plan Project — San Francisco Zoological Society 

Dear Ms. Opsahh 

As a follow-up to our submittal of [he Public Information Worksheet for the Phase II Master Plan 
Project, we are providing additions] information for the inceptive projects. 

In our discussions, we agreed to describe our first two years of work (starting in 1998-1999) that will be 
funded by an initial 511 million bond ade. The initial prosrrarn elements that need funding are listed 
below. 



Descriptions of each project are shown in Attachment N. As shown below, we have condensed the 

budget (previously submitted as Attachment .J to the Public Information Worksheet) to show only the 
SI 1 million budget of the incipient projects. 

Nami Project Total Bond Funds Private Funds 

1. Education Center S2.530.KX) S2.31U.IXXJ 5220,000 

2. Animal Resource Cemer 52,330.000 $1,920,000 £410.000 

3. Zoo Support Facilities S3, 120,000 S2.850.0OO £270.000 

4. Administration Facilities $2,340,000 £2,150,000 S190.0O0 

5. Public Art Program SBOO.OOO £800,000 

6. Repair &. Replacement Projects $2.100-000 S870.QQL! S 1,230,000 

Sii.220.000 S 10.900,000 . S2.320.000 



Additionally, as requested, we have included the recent reimbursement resolution item from the July 16° 
Pares &. Recreation Commission Meeting is Atuchxtrent O 

Please C&ll me ar (415) 753-8195 if any further information u required. 

Sincerely, 




>bcrt DeLiso 
New Zoo Team 
Program Manager 



Tin San Fkx.SCISCO Zoological SOCLETT 

1 Zoo Rjoad 

San fraueisco, CA y^jji-io^S 

f*Xj) 753-7080 

Fax (41 s) 6Si-iojj 



e 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 3 - File 98-1291 

Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Recreation and Park Department (RPD) 

Supplemental appropriation ordinance appropriating 
$1,000,000 for the Marina Yacht Harbor Dredging Project 
for the Recreation and Park Department (RPD). 

81,000,000 

Marina Yacht Harbor Special Revenue Unappropriated 
Fund Balance 

The Recreation and Park Department (RPD) operates and 
maintains a 700 berth marina, located on the City's 
waterfront between the Presidio and Fort Mason. The 
proposed supplemental appropriation ordinance would 
appropriate SI, 000, 000 from the Marina Yacht Harbor 
Special Revenue Fund to fund the Marina Yacht Harbor 
Dredging Project. 

The Marina Yacht Harbor Dredging Project involves the 
dredging of approximately 86,800 cubic yards of sediment 
at the Yacht Harbor and will take place in two phases. In 
the first phase, three priority areas or "episodes", 
consisting of 62,700 cubic yards in the main channel, will 
be dredged. The second phase will involve the dredging of 
two additional episodes, consisting of 24,100 cubic yards. 
The first phase is expected to commence on approximately 
August 31, 1998 and will be completed by September 16, 
1998. The second phase will commence on approximately 
October 1, 1998 and will be completed by mid-October, 
1998. 

Mr. Wallis Lee of the Department of Public Works (DP\Y) 
advises that an Invitation for Bids (IFB) for this project 
was published in the San Francisco Independent on July 
14, 1998, with a deadline to respond of July 29, 1998. Mr. 
Lee advises that no bids were submitted. According to 
Mr. George Wong of the City Attorney's Office, a 
department is permitted to negotiate directly with a 
qualified contractor when no bids have been submitted in 
response to an IFB, as long as the contractor's estimated 
cost does not exceed the DPW engineer's estimate. Mr. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

6 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Lee advises that the engineer's estimate for this project is 
$13.00 per cubic yard, which would result in a total 
contract cost of $1,128,400 ($13.00 per cubic yard x 86.800 
cubic yards). 

Mr. Lee advises that DPW is currently in the process of 
negotiating a contract with Dutra Group, a dredging 
company with previous experience working with other 
Bay Area government agencies and in San Francisco's 
harbor. According to Mr. Lee, the contractor and DPW 
have agreed to a price of $8.25 per cubic yard, for a total 
estimated contract cost of $716,100 ($8.25 per cubic yard 
x 86,800 cubic yards). 

Budget: Based in part on the engineer's estimate of $13.00 per 

cubic yard, RPD had originally estimated that the total 
project cost for the Marina Yacht Harbor Dredging Project 
would be $1,497,000. The source of funds for this project 
include $497,000 in Marina Yacht Harbor Revenue Funds 
previously appropriated in the FY 1997-98 ($397,000) and 
FY 1998-99 ($100,000) budgets and this supplemental 
appropriation request of $1,000,000 (see Comment No. 2). 

Based on the above contractor's estimate of $8.25 per 
cubic yard, the revised budget for this project is $923,800, 
as shown in the Attachment provided by DPW. 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Peg Stevenson the Controller's Office, 

as of August 3, 1998, the Marina Yacht Harbor Special 
Revenue Fund had an unappropriated revenue balance of 
$1,156,603. This fund consists primarily of berth and 
mooring fees and rental and concession revenue generated 
by the Yacht Harbor. 

2. According to Ms. Deborah Learner of RPD. $397,000 in 
Marina Yacht Harbor Revenue Funds budgeted for 
dredging the Yacht Harbor during FY 1997-98 were 
carried forward to FY 1998-99 because the Yacht Harbor 
was not dredged during FY 1997-98. RPD further advises 
that the subject request of $1,000,000 was not included in 
its FY 1998-99 annual budget request because the project 
scope and cost had not been determined at the time that 
RPD submitted its budget request to the Mayor's Office. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

3. Based on the revised budget of S923.800 for the 
Marina Yacht Harbor Dredging Project and on the 
availability of S497.000 in previously appropriated but 
unexpended funds, there is presently a need for $426,800 
in additional funds. Therefore, the proposed 

supplemental appropriation ordinance should be reduced 
by S573.200. from $1,000,000 to S426,800, based on RPD's 
actual funding needs. 

Recommendations: 1. Reduce the proposed supplemental appropriation 

ordinance by $573,200. from $1,000,000 to $426,800, in 
accordance with Comment No. 3. 

2. Approve the proposed supplemental appropriation 
ordinance as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment 



San Francisco Marina Maintenance Dredging Project 

Summary of Construction Budget 

Spec. No. 1072N 



Construction Support 


Total budget for 
each discipline 


Construction Support-Hydraulics 

(Review shp submittals, req lor info, 

site field work/investiaatlon) 


S 16.600 00 


"Construction Support-3CM 

(Inspection. Contract/Consultant 

Admin) 


S 9500000 


A3T (Perform Sampling of Dredged 
viat'l-Contract thru BCM) 


S 9.000.00 


Sea Surveyors/Baseline (Perform Pre 
& Post Survev-Contract thru BCM) 


S 10.500.00 


















(1) Construction Support Total: 


S 131,100.00 



"Construction Estimate Including 

Inner Basin: S 716,100.00 
*~"MoblllzatiorVDemoblllzation (2 

times) S 50,000.00 
Award to Contractor Cost 

(Subtotal) $ 766,100.00 

10*/. Contingency S 76,610.00 

Construction Cost S 792,710.00 

(2) Say: S 792,700.00 

(1)+(2) Total Pro joct Cost for 

Construction: S 923.800.00 

3CM will be required for night time inspection because of the 24 hr 
dredging work. 

Construction estimate is based on negotiation w/ the Dulra Group to 
dredge 86.300 CY at S3.25/CY. 

* Cos! for Mobilization/Demobiiization is S25.000 6ach time. 
Assume the Contractor will have to mobilize & demobilize twice 



Wl.-ft»v-S-n»38/6/?e 



Page 1 of 1 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 4 -File 98-1279 



Department: 
Item: 



Services to be 
Performed: 

Description: 



Juvenile Probation Department 

Resolution concurring with the Controller's certification 
that intake and shelter services to status offenders can 
continue to be practically performed by private contractor 
for lower cost than similar work services performed by the 
City and County employees. 



Intake and Shelter to Status Offenders 

Charter Section 10.104 provides that the City may 
contract with private firms for services which had been 
performed by City employees if the Controller certifies, 
and the Board of Supervisors concurs, that such services 
can in fact be performed by private firms at a lower cost 
than similar work services performed by Citj* employees. 

The Controller has determined that contracting for intake 
and shelter services to status offenders for FY 1998-99 
would result in estimated savings as follows: 



Lowest Highest 

Salary Salary 

Step Step 

$762,660 $948,317 
212.220 241.406 



Citv Operated Service Costs 

Salaries 
Fringe Benefits 



Total 

Contractual Service Costs 



$974,880 $1,189,723 
639.942 660.805 



Comments: 



Estimated Savings 



$334,938 $528,918 



1. The Juvenile Probation Department reports that 
contractual services were first certified as required under 
Proposition J (Charter Section 10.104) m FA' 1983-84 and 
have been continuously provided by an outside contractor 
since then. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

2. Mr. Lonnie Holmes of the Juvenile Probation 
Department reports that the one-year contract with 
Huckleberry Youth Programs, Inc. expired on June 30, 
1998. The Juvenile Probation Department plans to 
exercise its option to renew this contract for FY 1998-99 
under a three-year contract agreement with Huckleberry 
Youth Programs, Inc. Mr. Holmes states that such 
contract agreement was last renewed in FY 1996-97. The 
proposed resolution should be amended to provide for 
retroactively. 

3. The Contractual Services Cost used for the purpose of 
this analysis is the Huckleberry Youth Program, Inc.'s 
projected FY" 1998-99 cost for Intake and Shelter Services. 
Additionally, the Controller's Office advises that the 
contractual services costs include one full time City 
position, an 8442 Senior Probation Officer, for contract 
monitoring. 

4. The Controller's supplemental questionnaire with the 
Department's responses is shown in the Attachment to 
this report. 

Recommendation: Amend the proposed resolution to provide for retroactively 

and approve the resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

11 






Page 1 or 2 



CHARTER 10.104.15 (PROPOSITION J) QUESTIONNAIRE 
DEPARTMENT: .h*mr<^ Proba tion Te B3 rtnert 

CONTRACT SERVICES: gfr*tftr P"^ IPMSfc S&rvicss frr Stan-* Offonriftr* 
CONTRACT PERIOD: Ju>v V "308 rhrryjjh Jupb 30 "!339 

1 ) Who performed the activity/sanies prior to contracting, cut? 

Juvenile Hall Counselors: 

3 - 33 1 6 Assistant Counselors 7. _: .832?J^our^^^^ Jjjyen?^_ Haji 

1 -8318 Counselor! I 

2) How many City ampJoy©68 were laid off as a rasutt of contracting cut? 

None. Eleven (1 * ) positions ware cut from the budgat, but no peiranent staff 
were laid off. 

3) Explain the disposition of employees, if they were net isld off. 

Permanent employees moved to posrtJons in other pans of Juvenile Hafl formerly 
fitted by the Oeoartrnenf s as needed cadre. 

4} What percerrtacs of City employees' time is spent on sorvlces to be contracted 
out? 

50% of 1 -8414 Supervising ProcaiSan Officer 100% of 2 -33*3 Counselor!! 
100% of 1 -3442 Senior ProoatJon Officer 100% of 1 -8320 Counselor 

100% of 3 - 3440 Probation Office's 

5) How long have the services been contracted out? !s it ifkeiy to be a one-time 
or an ongoing request for contacting out? 

The contract with Huddeberry Youth Programs, Inc. (formerty Youth Advocates) 
for a central recaivir.g faduty was first entered into by the JuveriUe Probation 
Department, February 1 , 1 S84. The contract expanded to indudo shatter and 
Intake for status offenders on Aprfi 1, 1989. Oearfy, thb agreement is ongoing 
and the Department expects to continue to ccmract cut to obtain these 3ecvioes. 



12 



Attachment ' " 
Page 2 of 2 

-2- 

6) What was the first year for a Proposition J certification? Has ft bear, certified for 
each subsequent year? 

The first year for the central receMng facility contract wes FY 1 983-84. The first 
year for the expanded contract was FY 1 S8S-8S. This contract has been 
renewed each subsequent yaer 

7) How wiR the services meet the goala of your MBEAVBE action plan? 

Huckleberry Youth Programs, Inc.. isa norvjjroflt agency, .therefore ft does not 

fan within the purview of MBEAV3E goais. AddirjonaPy. extensive outreach vtas 
accomplished at the Request for Qualifications stage seeking potentjai 
MBEAVBE providers. 



i) 



Does the proposed contract require that the contractor provide health insurance 
for 8a employees? Even rf not required, are health benefits provided? 

There ie no stipulation •n the body of the contract or within the scope of services, 
requinng the contractor to provide he^tn benefits. However, health benefits 
are provided by this ccrttractor. 

TtiQ contractor's answers to HRC Form 12B-V31 (OecteraCon: NondrscrimLTabon 
in Contracts and Benefits) acests that they offer health benefits to their 
employees. 

9) Does the proposed contractor provide bnnefits to employees with, spouses? 
If so, are the same benefits provded to employees wtth domestic oartnerB7 
If not how dees the proposed ccntractc.' cempty with the Domestic Partners 
Ordinance? 

The contractor's answers to HRC Form 12B-1 CI (Dedaratxxv. NondisenrrdnatJon 
in Contracts and Benefits) attest they offer health benefits to their errtployeeo 
with spouses. These same benefits are provided to employees with domestic 
partners. 

Department Representative; Chevenrta 5dl 

Telephone Number: 753-7813 



13 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 5 - File 98-1236 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Department of Public Health (DPH) 

Ordinance amending Part II, Chapter V, of the San Francisco 
Municipal Code (Health Code) by amending Section 128 
thereof, fixing patient rates for services furnished by City 
and County health and mental health care providers, 
authorizing retroactively the effective date of July 1, 1998. 

The San Francisco Municipal Code requires the City to 
approve an ordinance each year fixing patient rates for 
services provided by City and County health and mental 
health care providers. DPH reviews its charges for services 
each year and makes adjustments, when appropriate, to 
provide for a full recovery of costs. The proposed ordinance 
would fix patient rates for San Francisco General Hospital 
(SFGH), Laguna Honda Hospital (LHH), the City's 13 
Primary Care Clinics, and the Community Mental Health 
Services and Community Substance Abuse Services provided 
by DPH. The ordinance would also authorize retroactively 
the effective date of July 1, 1998 for the proposed patient 
rates. The proposed patient rates apply only to direct payors 
(i.e., patients who pay their own medical bills) and private 
third-party payors (i.e., health insurance companies). Public 
third-party payors such as the Federal Medicare and State 
Medi-Cal Programs are not included in this rate structure. 

The Attachment provided by DPH compares the FY 1997-98 
patient rates with the proposed FY 1998-99 patient rates. 
Following a cost analysis, local rate surveys, and a review of 
reimbursement rates, DPH has determined that various 
increases in the rates for services are necessary to ensure 
that the patient rates recover the costs to provide the health 
services being provided by DPH. Changes in rates for FY 
1998-99 include 5% increases in the services provided at San 
Francisco General Hospital and in the Primary Care clinics, 
and a 5% increase in residential detoxification services for 
substance abuse clients. DPH has proposed a 20% decrease 
in outpatient case management services for mental health 
clients to reflect the actual cost of providing this service. The 
proposed ordinance also includes new rates for providing (a) 
socialization skills training to outpatient mental health 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12. 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



clients and (b) residential sen-ices to substance abuse clients 
and their families. DPH has not proposed any changes in the 
rates for (a) home health services, (b) services provided at 
Laguna Honda Hospital, and (c) most mental health and 
substance abuse services. 



Comments: 



1. According to Ms. Anne Okubo of DPH, the Department's 
FY 1998-99 budget includes $33,016,742 in patient revenues 
from third party payors including private insurance 
companies and from individuals who are able to pay for their 
medical bills. The proposed rates for FY 1998-99 are 
estimated to generate increased revenues in FY* 1998-99 of 
$5,590,750 over the $27,425,992 in patient revenues 
budgeted by DPH in FY 1997-98. According to Ms. Okubo, 
the FY 1998-99 budget is based on the patient rates 
contained in the proposed ordinance. These rates became 
effective on July 1, 1998, and therefore this ordinance 
provides for retroactivity. 

2. According to Ms. Okubo, the proposed patient rates (a) are 
consistent with the rates charged by other Bay Area health 
care institutions, (b) achieve consistency within the 
Community Health Network, which is DPH's integrated 
health care delivery system, and (c) provide for the recovery 
of DPH's costs. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



DEPARTMENT OF PU3LIC HEALTH 

PROPOSED PATIENT RATES 

FY 98-99 



TYPE OF SERVICE 

COMMUNITY HEALTH NETWORK 





CURRENT 


PROPOSED 




UNITS OF 


RATE 


RATE 


PERCENT 


SERVICE 


FY 97-98 


FY 93-99 


CHANGE 



San Francisco General Hospital 
Supplies & Drugs 



Unit 



Special Price List 



In-Patient Care 
Medical Surgical 
Intensive Care 
Coronary Care 
Chest-Pulmonary 
Stepdown Units 
Pediatrics 
Obstetrics 
Nursery 

New Born 

Observation/Well Eaby 
Semi-Intensive Care 
Intensive Care 
Labor/Delivery - 6G 
Labor/Delivery Hours of Stay 
Psychiatric Inpatient 
Psychiatric Forensic Inpatient - 7L 
AIDS Unit-5A 
Security Unit - 7D 
Skilled Nursing Facility 
Mental Health Rehab. SNF 



Day 

Day 
Day 
Day 
Day 
Day 
Day 

Day 

Day 

Day 

Day 

Day 

Hour 

Day 

Day 

Day 

Day 

Day 

Day 



1,010 


1,051 


5% 


2,339 


2.509 


5% 


2.273 


2,387 


5% 


2.312 


2.427 


5% 


1 .553 


1 .635 


5% 


1.010 


1,051 


5% 


1.010 


1,061 


5% 


614 


644 


5% 


1.010 


1,061 


~% 


1,387 


1.455 


5% 


2.003 


2.103 


5% 


1,010 


1,051 


5% 


53 


61 


5% 


1.048 


1.101 


5% 


1.043 


1.101 


5% 


1,010 


1,061 


5% 


1.010 


1,061 


5% 


435 


458 


5% 


435 


458 


5% 



Surgical Services 

Minor Surgery Pre-Op Holding Room 
Minor Surgery I (Come & Go) 



Minor Surgery II 

Major Surgery Pre-Op Holding 
Major Surgery I 



Room 




130 


137 


5% 


1/4 Hour 




135 


195 


5% 


1/2 Hour 




370 


388 


5% 


3/4 Hour 




555 


5S3 


5% 


Full 1 Hour 




739 


776 


5% 


Ea. Add'l 1/4 


Hr. 


165 


195 


5% 


1st Hour 




801 


842 


5% 


Ea. Add'l 1/2 Hr. 


400 


420 


5% 


Room 




130 


137 


5% 


1st Hour 




1.195 


1.254 


5% 



L\9a-«eu:>ac5V_ 



16 



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 

PROPOSED PATIENT RATES 

FY 98-99 



TYPE OF SERVICE 

Major Surgery II 
Major Surgery III 
Extraordinary Surgery 
Surgery (2 Teams) 
Surgery (3 Teams) 
Recovery Room 

Anesthesia 

Argon Laser Treatment 
Therapeutic Abortion 





CURRENT 


PROPOSED 




UNITS OF 


RATE 


RATE 


PERCENT 


SERVICE 


FY 97-98 


FY 98-99 


CHANGE 


Add'l 1/2 Hour 


417 


438 


CO' 


1st Hour 


1,348 


1.416 


5% 


Add'l 1/2 Hour 




452 


5% 


1st Hour 


1.502 


1.577 


5% 


Add'l 1/2 Hour 


555 


5e3 


5% 


1st Hour 


1.694 


1.779 


5% 


Add'l 1/2 Hour 


615 


647 


5% 


Procedure 


2.348 


2.465 


5% 


Add'l 1/2 Hour 


78S 


823 


5% 


Procedure 


3.045 


3.198 


5% 


Add'l 1/2 Hour 


1.024 


1.076 


5% 


1st Hour 






5% 


2nd Add'l Hour 




116 


5% 


3rd Add'l Hour 


69 


73 


6% 


First 1/2 Hour 


367 


385 


5% 


Add'l Minute 


12 




0% 


Procedure 


1.211 


1.272 


5% 


Procedure 


200 


210 


5% 



Emergency Clinic 
Level I 
Level II 
Level HI 
Level IV 
Level V 
Level VI 
Non-Critical Observation 



Critical Observation 



Room 
Room 
Room 
Room 
Room 
Room 
0-2 Hours 
2-4 Hours 
4-6 Hours 
0-2 Hours 
2-4 Hours 
4-5 Hours 



Resuscitation 



73 


77 


5% 


100 


105 




125 


133 


6% 


233 


245 


5% 


532 


£59 


5% 


1.254 


■ 




73 


77 


5% 


213 


::- 


;'•: 


365 


384 




213 


224 


Z-: 


425 


•i4~ 




632 


654 


5 : c 


1 .254 


1.328 


f : : 



General Clinic 
Initial 

Brief E_xam 

Initial Intermediate 



Visit 
Visit 



67 
113 



70 
119 



4% 



3LOSOS\o»_'»i«» • « f>i-<j| Br C*ww 



17 



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 

PROPOSED PATIENT RATES 

FY 9B-99 



TYPE OF SERVICE 

Initial Comprehensive 

Targeted Case Management 
Established Patient 

Brief Exam 

Intermediate 

Comprehensive 
Use of Exam Room 





CURR 


ENT 


PROPOS 


ED 




UNITS OF 


RAT 


E 


RATE 




PERCENT 


SERVICE 


FY S7 


-98 


FY 98- 


39 


CHANGE 


Visit 




225 




247 


5% 


Visit 




125 




125 


0% 


Visit 




44 




46 


5% 


Visit 




67 




70 


4% 


Visit 




156 




165 


5% 


Room 




22 




24 


6% 



primary Ca-e 
Initial 

Comprehensive Exam 
Extended Exam 
Intermediate Exam 
Limited Exam 

Targeted Case Management 
Established Patient 

Comprehensive Exam 
Extended Exam 
Intermediate Exam 
Limited Exam 



Visit 
Visit 
Visit 
Visit 
Visit 

Visit 

Vsi; 
Visit 
Visit 



1 /5 


184 


5% 


125 


120 


4% 


95 


100 


5% 


65 


63 


5% 


125 


142 


5% 


150 


157 


5% 


75 


73 


4% 


50 


52 


4% 


25 


37 


6% 



Dental Services 

Initial Complete Exam 

Periodic Exam 

Prophylaxis - Adult 

Prophylaxis - Child 

Extract Single Tooth 

One Surface, Permanent Tooth 



Visit 
Visit 

Visit 
Visit 
Visit 
Visit 



25 


27 


6% 


25 


27 


6% 


50 


52 


4% 


45 


47 


4% 


70 


74 


6% 


65 


68 


5% 



Home Health Services 
Skilled Nursing 
Home Health Aide Services 
Medical Social Services 
Physical Therapy 
Occupational Therapy 
Speech Therapy 



Visit 
Visit 
Visit 
Visit 
Visit 
Visit 



147 


147 


0% 


79 


79 


0% 


203 


203 


0% 


141 


141 


0% 


141 


141 


0% 


145 


145 


0% 



L-tfft-wEuCr.acs'c' i 



• tncna e? c*~ 



18 



TYPE OF SERVICE 



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 

PROPOSED PATIENT RATES 

FY 98-99 



UNITS OF 
SERVICE 



CURRENT 

RATE 
FY 97-98 



PROPOSED 

RATE 

FY 98-99 



PERCENT 
CHANGE 



Laguna Honda Hospital 

Regular Hospital Rates 

Acute 

Rehabilitation 

Skilled Nursing Facility 
All Inclusive Rates 

Acute 

Rehabilitation 

Skilled Nursing Facility 



Day 
Day 
Day 

Per Diem 
Per Diem 
Day 



875 


875 


0% 


875 


875 


0% 


300 


300 


0% 


1.100 


1.100 


0% 


1.100 


1.100 


0% 


350 


350 


0% 



PUBLIC HEALTH 



Communitv Mental Health Service* 




24-Hour Service 




Inpatient 


24 Hours 


Skilled Nursing 


24 Hours 


Crisis Residential 


14 Hours 


Residential 


24 Hours 


Day Services 




Rehabilitation 


Full Day 


Intensive 


Full Day 


Intensive (children) 


Half Day 


Crisis Socialization 


Hour 


Crisis Stabilization 


Hour 


Socialization 


Hour 


Outpatient Services 




Case Management Brokerage 


Hour 


Mental Health Services 


Hour 


Medication Support 


Half Hour 


Crisis Intervention 


Hour 


Communitv Substance Abuse 





Residential - Basic 
Residential - Detoxification 
Residential - Family 
Residential - Medical Support 
Recovery Home 



24 Hours 
24 Hours 
24 Hours 
24 Hours 
24 Hours 



850 


850 


0% 


415 




0% 


250 


250 


0% 


125 


125 


0% 




110 


0% 


190 


190 


0% 


200 


200 


0% 


50 


50 


0% 


80 


BO 


0% 


- 


30 




100 


BC 


-20% 


150 


15C 


0% 


120 


120 


0% 


375 


375 


0% 



81 


81 


0% 


80 


B4 


5% 


- 


135 




200 


200 


0% 


70 


70 


0% 



■ .■*■•■•:- "■£■,-$■;-• 



19 



DEPARTMENT OF PU3LIC HEALTH 

PROPOSED PATIENT RATES 

FY 98-99 



TYPE OF SERVICE 

Therapeutic Community 
Outpatient (include Detox) 
Methadone Treatment 
Naltrexone Treatment 
Prevention/Intervention 
Day Care - Habilitative 





CURR 


ENT 


PROPOS 


ED 




UNITS OF 


RA1 


"E 


RATE 




PERCENT 


SERVICE 


FY 97-98 


FY 98-5 


9 


CHANGE 


24 Hours 




80 




80 


0% 


Per Contract 




108 




108 


0% 


Hour 




26 




25 


0% 


Per Contract 




45 




45 


0% 


Hour 




50 




50 


0% 


Per Contract 




108 




108 


0% 



L\se-»«ucnecs\cv»i«« ■» &oo«a &^ c«™ 



20 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 6 -File 98-1160 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Police Department (SFPD) & Municipal Railway 

Resolution waiving fees to be charged for crowd control 
and re-routing transit lines in connection with the Pink 
Saturday Party on June 27. 1998. 

On June 27, 1998, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, 
Inc. ("the Sisters"), a non-profit organization, organized 
the Pink Saturday Party ("the Party"). The Department 
of Parking and Traffic (DPT), in accordance with 
Administrative Code Section 2.70-6, granted the Sisters a 
permit to temporarily use Castro Street between Market 
& 19 th Streets and 18 th Street between Collingwood & 
Hartford Streets in the Castro District for the purpose of 
conducting the Party. According to Ms. Cindy Shamban 
of the DPT, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender 
Pride Celebration Committee, a non-profit organization, 
paid the requisite S80 application fee to the DPT for the 
street fair permit. The Party was held on the Saturday 
before the City's annual Lesbian. Gay, Bisexual, 
Transgender (LGBT) Pride Celebration and Parade. 

Approval of the proposed resolution would result in 
waiving Police Department fees of S2,500 and Municipal 
Railway fees of $1,400 that would otherwise be charged to 
the Sisters in connection with the Part} - . 

According to Lieutenant Donald Carlson, the Party 
required a perimeter patrol of Police Officers, for the 
enforcement of alcohol, drug and disturbance of peace 
regulations. Attachment 1 is a cost report, provided by 
Lieutenant Carlson, detailing S27,634 in personnel costs 
incurred by the SFPD. Such personnel costs include 
818,995 in Police overtime, S7,556 in regular pay, and 
SI, 083 in premium pay. However, in accordance with 
Administrative Code Section 2.70-6, a street fair, as in 
this case, is charged a maximum of S2,500 for SFPD 
service related to the event. According to Lieutenant 
Carlson, the Police Department believes that this fee of 
$2,500 should be paid to the City. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



In addition, according to Mr. Art Curtis of the Municipal 
Railway, the Party required the use of diesel buses 
instead of the electric bus lines which normally operate 
through the Castro District in order for the Municipal 
Railway to transport MUNI patrons around the perimeter 
of the event. In accordance with Section 2.70-6, a street 
fair is charged $6.00 per electrically powered vehicle 
hour 1 per line affected by the event. Mr. Curtis states 
that the Party affected two electric bus lines for a 
combined total of 234 hours. Attachment 2 is a cost 
report, provided by Mr. Curtis, detailing $1,400 in costs, 
based on $6 per hour for 234 hours of affected service, 
incurred by the Municipal Railway. According to Mr. 
Curtis, the Municipal Railway believes that this fee of 
$1,400 should be paid to the City. 

According to Sister Kitty Catalyst, the Party served as a 
pre-LGBT Pride Celebration and Parade celebration. 
Sister Catalyst states that the Sisters did not benefit from 
holding the Party but rather aided the City by providing 
party-goers with portable restroom facilities, monitoring 
street barricades, and helping keep order at a social, 
cultural event that occurs spontaneously each year in the 
Castro District. 

Sister Catalyst reports that an estimated 70,000 persons 
attended the Party and the Sisters collected voluntary 
donations of $17,403 from Party-attendees. Attachment 3 
contains a budget for the Party, provided by Sister 
Catalyst, showing that such donation revenues were used 
to pay for $12,903 in event expenditures, resulting in a 
positive balance of $4,500. 

Sister Catalyst also advised the Budget Analyst that the 
balance of $4,500 was distributed to 11 non-profit, 
community-based organizations as follows: 



1 Vehicle hour means the number of hours each coach on a line is in operation during the day of the 
event. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Name of Non-Profit Organization Grant Awarded 

Project Face to Face S250 

Center for Alternative Families 250 

WOMAN, Inc. 250 

ACT/UP Golden Gate Writer's Pool 250 

Eureka Valley Teen Program 500 

MCC Simply Supper Program 500 

LYRIC YLP Conference 500 

Home Care Companions 500 

Old Lesbians Organizing for Change 500 

Needle Exchange Emergency Distribution 500 

MUMC - Castro Beautification 500 

Total S4,500 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



03/03/93 10:15 FIELD OPERfiTIONS -> 415 252 0461 



NO. 124 P002/003 



oa 

C2/K 

035 
Q50 
QSO/K 

Q60 

Q60/K 

QBO 

0360 
0460 

c<ise 

0400 
0395 

0390 
1424 
1426 

1446 

14S0 
1934 

7364 
7410 
8207 

6313 
6236 
5239 

B2S0 
82S1 



/NAME i STREET f AIRE/PRE-OAY PRIDE CELEBRATION" 
/27/»8 COVKi.tr: . 980S22 

HOURS 



472 7 



ATTACHMENT 1 



NUM 



RIO 


EWW 


120. o 


3:c . 


9C. C 


ss. 


. 





10.0 


73. 


10. 


6. 



01 



o.c 

0.0 



0.0 
0.0 



.0 
0.0 



0.0 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 



_?RJSM 

371. 

141. C 

0.0 

70.0 



14.0 

4.0 



0.0 
0.0 



0. 

0. £ 



1 


969 . 


2 


273. 




c . 


3 


277. 




360 . 




20S. 




216 . 



79 240.0 473 .0 

MlBC ExpiSC. Exp Cosii 

EVENT TOTALS: Of;=>79 U| 



. O 627 . 



7.SS6 . 



16. S9S . 





SUB -TOTAL 


EM 


COSTS 


597. 


It. liC 


2(1. 


S,3JS 








131 . 


3.753 


36 . 


780 


32. 


627 


9 . 


2 as 



0. 



C 1,083. 27.633, 
Houri (RegrEWWi-OT! -713 . Tocal CofitiJ 37,633.27 






24 



Aug-04-98 07:01 




ATTACHMENT 2 



SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL RAILWAY 
CHIEF TRANSIT CONTROL INSPECTOR'S OFFICE 



2500-MARIPOSA STREET 
OFFICE = (415) 554-9286 



(Room 7), SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94110-1425 
FAX = (415) 554-9902 



To: Gabriel Cabrera 03 August 1998 

BudgetSAnalyst 

From: Art Curtis @ 

Chief Transit Control Inspector 

Subj: MUNI COSTS FOR PINK SATURDAY 
I 
As previously discussed, the motor coach substitution costs for putting diesel 

buses on the normally electric bus lines #24-DIVlSADERO and #33-STANYAN 

came to 234:07 hours, for a total cost, at $6.00 per vehicle hour, of 

$1404.70. 

The overtime for MUNI Transit Service Inspectors assigned to supervise the 
re-routing of buses, extra service provided on the MUNI Metro, etc. amount to 
a total of 20 hours at the overtime rate (including benefits) of $55 per hour. 
Thus an expenditure of $1100.00. 

The costs of placing 10 extra MUNI Metro trains into service between 5:00pm 
and 1 :00am, to accommodate the heavy travel to and from the Castro Area, 
and operating between the Embarcadero and West Portal Stations, amounts 
to $2763.12, also at the overtime rate. 



Above costs do not include the administrative functions, performed during the 
normal work day, by myself, schedule makers, division dispatchers and other 
support personnel. 



Please call me if you have any further questions, 554-9286. 



cc: Chron Out j 

Pink Saturday File 



25 



'i rAA j. 410 4»o iaui 



iKA^s-ot.^t.fvAL bh 



«0 



ATTACHMENT 3 



Pink Saturday Prelimu .ary Budget 



Proposal & Planning 


donated 


Permit 


S 1 40 Gate charge S60 inc) 


Awareness Campaign 


S 15 (est.) 


(Pink posters/ flyers to all merchants w/ deas & needs; partnering groups 


proposal letters, postage, etc) 




Command Center space 


donated 


Food snacks & bottled water for vc lunteers 


S 45.50 (est) 


Collection 




Armored Car/Bank Services 


S 976.15 (est.) 


Barricades 


S.F. P.D. 


Signage 




Large Signs 


SPIhas 


"Benefiting Groups" Signs 


S 1 3 (est.) 


Buckets 


$ 70.53 do) 


Stickers (25,000 2") 


$ 3S5.72 


T-shirtS (l 44 w/set up &. artwork) 


$ 775 (est) 


Partnering Groups ($50 per volunteer - «•.. 50) 


$ 31 50 (63 gate volunteers) 


Portapotties (estimate 40 w/at least 6 handicap) 


S 1953 


DJ & Sound System w/Security 


$ 700 


Recycling 


SF Community Recyclers 


Insurance 


S 1095 


Miscellaneous Supplies 


S 5 (est.) 


Victory/ Awards Party/Public Presentatk n 


S 250 


SFI - Event Management - sec attached ] itter 


$ 3000 


Accountant Fees 


S 1 50 (est) 


'99 (permit, event seed money) 


$ 179.72 


Total outlays 


$12,903.62 


Total estimated Revenue 


$17,403.62 


Total outlays 


-$12,903.62 



Community Grants (beside* Gate Part™ 



$ 4.500 



26 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 7 -File 98-1159 



Department: 



Item: 



Treasurer/Tax Collector 
Department of Public Health 

Resolution authorizing the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue 
of the Treasurer/Tax Collector's Office to recover the cost 
of medical and dental care provided by County hospitals 
to persons injured by third parties under circumstances 
creating tort liability, as authorized by the State 
Government Code Sections 23004.1 through 23004.3, and 
authorizing the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue to 
compromise, settle or waive claims in connection with 
such recoveries. 



Description: 



Sections 23004.1 and 230004.2 of the State Government 
Code provide a County with the authority to recover the 
County's costs of providing medical and dental care to 
persons injured by third parties under circumstances 
creating tort liability, and the authority to compromise, 
settle or waive claims in connection with such recover}'. 
Section 23004.3 provides that Section 23004.1 and Section 
230004.2 shall only become operative in a County if such 
Sections of the Government Code are formally adopted by 
resolution by the Board of Supervisors. The proposed 
resolution would authorize the Bureau of Delinquent 
Revenue to utilize the collection remedies as provided for 
in Sections 230004.1 and 23004.2. 



Deputy City Attorney Paula Jesson advises that the 
intent of the proposed resolution is to provide the Bureau 
of Delinquent Revenue with a collection remedy in the 
event an uninsured patient is treated for injuries caused 
by the negligent misconduct of a third party, but the 
patient fails to assert a litigated claim. This may occur if 
the patient believes that he or she ma)- not recover 
sufficient net proceeds in excess of attorney's fees and 
hospitalization charges. Mr. Robert Fletcher of the Tax 
Collector's Legal Section advises that recent ballot 
initiatives, for example Proposition 213, have limited the 
amount of damages that an uninsured or drinking driver 
may recover from a third party even though the third 
party was at fault in causing the patient's injuries. Under 
such circumstances, Section 23004.1(b) authorizes the 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
27 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



County to commence an action in its own name against 
the third party specifically to recover the medical and 
dental treatment costs incurred by the County. 

Mr. Fletcher advises that in order to implement the 
remedy provided under Section 23004.1(b), the 
Department of Public Health must discover (a) the 
existence of a third party cause of action in favor of an 
injured person who was treated at a County hospital and; 
(b) that the injured person does not intend to sue or 
otherwise formally assert the claim against the third 
party. According to Ms. Anne Okubo of the Department of 
Public Health, County hospital personnel are (a) routinely 
instructed to ascertain whether or not the patient intends 
to sue the third party who injured the patient and; fa) 
immediately refer the billing file to the Bureau of 
Delinquent Revenue of the Treasurer/Tax Collector's 
Office for appropriate litigation to be taken by the County 
against the third party to collect the amount of the 
County's costs in providing medical treatment services to 
the injured patient. Any lawsuit authorized by Section 
23004.1(b), must be filed by the Bureau of Delinquent 
Revenue against the negligent third party, within one 
year of the incident that caused the patient's injuries. 

If the injured person files a lawsuit or makes an 
unlitigated claim against the third party, the Bureau of 
Delinquent Revenue is presently able to obtain recoveries 
from a patient's third party lawsuit and unlitigated claim 
through a hen against the patient's recovery proceeds 
from the third party. These liens were authorized by 
municipal ordinance and were enacted by the County 
prior to Government Code Section 23004. 1. 1 However. Mr. 
Fletcher advises that if an injured party fails to file a 
lawsuit or make a non-litigated claim against the 
negligent party, the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue is 
unable to apply a lien to recover payment of the County's 
costs. Therefore approval of the proposed legislation 
would authorize the County to file a lawsuit against the 
third party in order for the County to recover its costs in 



1 In Citv and County of San Francisco v Sweet. (1995) 12 Cal.4' b 105, the State Supreme Court 
affirmed San Francisco County's right to recover the full amount of its hospitalization recovery hen 
based on local ordinance. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 12, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



providing medical treatment services to the injured 
persons. 

Although the proposed resolution expressly preserves the 
existing third party hen remedies, the proposed resolution 
would provide the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue with a 
collection remedy by aUowing the Bureau of Delinquent 
Revenue to commence an action on behalf of the County 
against the negligent third party who caused the injury to 
the patient of a County hospital, specifically to recover the 
County's costs in treating the patient for any medical and 
dental treatment services incurred by the injured party. 



Recommendation: 



Approve the proposed resolution. 




[arvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 
29 






,M I N U T E S 

^FINANCE COMMITTEE 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

CITY AND CODMTY OF^SAN FRANCISCO 

REGULAR MEETING 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

AUG 2 1998 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



WEDNESDAY. AUGUST 19, 1998 - 1;00 P.M. 



VETERANS BUILDING 
401 VAN NESS AVENUE 
ROOM 410 



MEMBERS: SUPERVISORS MABEL TENG, BARBARA KAUFMAN, GAVIN NEWSOM 

CLERK: JONI BLANCHARD 

ABSENT: Supervisor Teng for entire meeting. 

Meeting Commenced: 1:01 p.m. 

REGULAR CALENDAR 



1. File 98-1286 . [First Offender Prostitution Program Fee] 
Ordinance amending Administrative Code by adding Section 
10.193-1, authorizing the District Attorney's Office to collect 
fees from participants in the First Offender Prostitution 
Program. (District Attorney) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; District Atty. 

Representative; Susan Trice, District Atty.; Mike 
Lawson, SFPD; Ray Cory, SFPD; John Madden, 
Controller's Office; Norma Kotalling, requesed 
additional funding for services. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Amendment of the whole (bearing same 
title) adopted. Recommended as amended. 



File 98-1321 . [Emergency Repair, Southeast Water Pollution 
Plant] Resolution approving the expenditure of funds for the 
emergency work to demolish and remove the collapsed roof cove: 
of SEWPCP Digester No. 5. - $182,573.00. (Public Utilities 
Commission) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



File 98-1280 . [Purchase of 345 Randolph Street Property] 
Resolution authorizing the purchase of at 345 Randolph Street 
(Assessor's Parcel Number 7118/44) for the San Francisco Public 
Library's Oceanview Branch Library; and adopting findings under 
the California Environmental Quality Act and findings pursuant 
to City Planning Code Section 101.1. (Real Estate Department) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; City Librarian. 

Speaking in support: Mary Harris, Lillie Simms, Velma Wills, 
Doug Moran, Darcus Thomas, Royce Vaughn. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

File 98-1088 . [Flea Market] Ordinance amending Administrative 
Code by adding Chapter 9B, Sections 9.B1 through 9B.9, 
authorizing City Administrator to establish and regulate a flea 
market at 100 Alemany Boulevard; charging vendors at the market 
a fee for the privilege of selling at the market; and ratifying 
and approving fees collected between June 1996 and the effective 
date of this ordinance. (Supervisor Newsom) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; David Frieders, Dept. of 
Agriculture, Weights and Measures - support. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 

File 98-0997 . [Department of Emergency Communications] 
Ordinance amending Administrative Code by amending Section 7.7 
to eliminate the authority of the Director of Emergency Services 
to manage the City's 911 communications facility and by adding 
Section 2A.200 to create a Department of Emergency 
Communications, under a Director of Emergency Communications 
appointed by the Mayor, to operate the City's 911 communications 
facility. (Supervisor Medina) 

SPEAKERS: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Mike Martin, 911 Project. 

ACTION: Hearing held. Recommended. 



V OTE ON ALL ITEMS WAS 2-0. WITH SUPERVISOR TENG ABSENT FOR ENTIR E 
MEETING. 

Meeting Adjourned: 1:59 p.m. 



1 



CITY AND COUNTY 




Public Library, Gov't Information Ctr.. 5 th Fir. 
Attn: Susan Horn, Dept. 41 



OF SAN FRANCISCO 



J30ARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



August 14, 1998 



TO: ^Finance Committee 

FROM: ^Budget Analyst fc t ._-»-U-..r.. Ar 



■s 



SUBJECT: August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 
Item 1 -File 98-1286 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



DOCUMENTS OEPT. 

AUG 1 8 1998 

Public ubsabv 



District Attorney's Office 



Ordinance amending Article XVI, Chapter 10, Part I of 
the San Francisco Municipal Code (Administrative Code) 
by adding Section 10.193-1, authorizing the District 
Attorney's Office to collect fees from participants in the 
First Offender Prostitution Program and establishing the 
First Offender Prostitution Program Special Revenue 
Fund. 

The District Attorney's First Offender Prostitution 
Program (Program) was started in January of 1995 as a 
collaborative partnership of local government agencies 
(including the Police Department, District Attorney's 
Office, Department of Pubhc Health, Sheriffs Office, 
Probation Department, and Juvenile Justice System) and 
community-based service providers and advocates. Since 
1995, the Program has been operated by a nonprofit 
organization called the Friends of Victim Witness 
(Friends). The goal of the Program is to change the 
current practice of revolving door arrests and prosecution 
of prostitutes through the creation of a continuum of 
prevention, intervention and treatment services for 
women and girls to facilitate their permanent exit from 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



the life of prostitution. In addition, the Program provides 
an educational program for "customers of prostitutes" 
(customers) in order to demonstrate how they are 
implicated as supporters of the system, thereby 
discouraging their further participation. 

Participants in the Program consist of both prostitutes 
and customers who are arrested for violating Penal Code 
Section 647(b). Such violations include soliciting, agreeing 
to engage in, or engaging in any act of prostitution. 
Typically, only persons with no prior criminal record are 
admitted into the Program, although eligibility is 
determined on a case by case basis. Customers who 
participate in the Program are charged an administrative 
fee of up to $500 by the Friends. Prostitutes who 
participate in the Program are not charged a fee. 
Participation in the Program by both customers and 
prostitutes is voluntary. In exchange for participating in 
the Program, participants are not formally charged with 
violating Penal Code Section 647(b). 

Ms. Teresa Serata of the District Attorney's Office reports 
that based on field work done in conjunction with an audit 
conducted by the Controller's Office, the District 
Attorney's Office plans to assume responsibility for the 
operation of the Program in FY 1998-99, pending 
approval by the Board of Supervisors of this proposed 
ordinance which would authorize the District Attorney's 
Office to charge fees to Program participants. The 
Controller's Office has indicated that it would be more 
appropriate for the District Attorney's Office to 
administer the Program than for the Friends to 
administer the Program. 

The proposed ordinance would amend Section 10.193-1 of 
the Administrative Code to authorize the District 
Attorney's Office to charge an administrative fee not to 
exceed $500 to customers arrested for violating Penal 
Code Section 647(b). Such persons would be charged a fee 
by the District Attorney's Office if they were determined 
by the District Attorney's Office to be eligible for the 
Program and if they were to voluntarily elect to 
participate in the Program. As noted before, prostitutes 
would not be charged this administrative fee. In addition 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

to authorizing the District Attorney's Office to collect fees, 
the proposed ordinance would also establish the First 
Offender Prostitution Program Special Revenue Fund 
where all such fees would be deposited. 

Under the proposed ordinance, the District Attorney's 
Office would be prohibited from charging a fee in excess of 
$500, and would be authorized, in consultation with the 
Controller, to reduce the fee to not less than $100 for 
individuals lacking the financial ability to pay, as 
determined by the District Attorney's Office. The proceeds 
from the collection of the fee would be deposited in the 
proposed First Offender Prostitution Program Special 
Revenue Fund and would be used to defray the costs of 
administering the Program. 

Not later than January 1 st of each year, the Controller 
would be required to reexamine the fee. If the Controller 
were to find that the maximum authorized fee did not 
recover the full costs of the services provided by the 
Program or that the minimum authorized fee exceeded 
the costs of the services provided by the Program, the 
Controller would submit a resolution for approval to the 
Board of Supervisors to modify the fee, effective as of the 
beginning of the following fiscal year. 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Serata, the proposed fee of $500 is 

based on the $294,624 in fee revenues collected by the 
Friends during calendar year 1997. Attachment 1, 
provided by the District Attorney's Office, shows the fee 
revenues totaling $657,197 which were realized by the 
Program between January 1996 and June 1998. The 
Program had 531 participants in 1996, 564 participants in 
1997, and 416 participants through July of 1998 of which 
401 were paying participants. The District Attorney's 
Office was unable to provide an estimate of the number of 
paying participants in 1996 and 1997. 

2. Ms. Grace Chan of the District Attorney's Office 
reports that the Program will serve an estimated 713 
participants in FY 1998-99 and will collect estimated 
revenues of $335,292, based on a fee of between $100 and 
$500, or an average fee of appi - oximately $488 per paying 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

participant, charged to an estimated 687 paying 
participants. 

3. According to Ms. Serata, $295,000 in Program fee 
revenue has been included in the District Attorney's FY 
1998-99 budget to offset the estimated cost of the Program 
during FY 1998-99 which is expected to be $295,000. The 
budgeted revenues of $295,000 are $40,292 less than the 
latest projected revenues of $335,292. Attachment 2 
contains the details for the $295,000 in budgeted Program 
costs as approved in the District Attorney's FY 1998-99 
budget. Ms. Serata reports that prior to January 1, 1999, 
the fee will be reviewed by the Controller to determine if 
the fee is generating revenues which are approximately 
equal to the costs of the services provided by the Program. 
If that is not the case, a resolution will be submitted by 
the Controller to the Board of Supervisors to provide for 
an adjustment to the fee. 

Recommendation: Based on actions previously taken by the Board of 

Supervisors to approve the Program revenues and 
expenditures in the FY* 1998-99 budget of the District 
Attorney, approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Attachment 1 



First Offender Prostitution Program 
Revenue - January 1996 through June 1993 



Jan-96 


$11,340 




FeD-96 


$10,846 




Mar-96 


$12,180 




Apr-S6 


512,731 




May-96 


51 0,755 




Jun-S6 


516,518 




Jul-96 


S17.625 




Aug-96 


$13,575 




Sep- 96 


$15,360 




;; Oct-96 


S29.131 




Nov- 96 


$21,900 




Dec- 96 


$22,865 


$194,927 


Jan-97 


$20,940 




Feb-97 


516,580 




Mar-97 


$11,230 




Apr-97 


$28,229 




May-97 


$23,395 




Jun-97 


$26,508 




Jul-97 


$26,274 




Aug-97 


$24,890 




Sep-97 


S23.654 




OcJ-97 


$33,425 




Nov-97 


$34,699 




Dec-97 


$24,700 


5294,624 


Jan-98 


S25,306 




Feb-98 


$18,500 




Mar-98 


$22,950 




Apr-98 


$31,560 




May-98 


S27.050 




Jun-98 


542,180 




Jul-98 






Aug-98 






Sep-98 






OG-98 






Nov-98 






Dec-98 




5167,646 


TOTAL Jan 96 - Jun 98 


S657.197 





8/7/98 1023 AM 



Attachment 2 



T — 'Z ~ ~ 



~ O i. 
— < Ui 

>- n. a 



»■ «i = 

O" • z 

■ a. — 

= 3 = 

i- >■ r 

»• < c 

-• r lj 



03- 
<y _ _ 

t n u 

•■* — • a 

o- ■> D 



2 * - 

- - - 
u o o 



ff> Z UJ 

. « J 

»» o a 

3- — 3 

e- a: A 

- a 



u. a: 



> o 'S3 

ac •- 9- u r 
S c* -* < 



W S &. 3C 



— 3 

a c ^ z - 1 
— — ~ > — 
" « o 






< < O oj O C 



a: a: 3 -• •- — 

~ — o »j — ik 

- — C a. 5 < 

q s m. m & a 



< cm a- C 



Mlu ir — 
- Z *w 3 
(-) — O — 2 »rt 



!— _ 3 </l X 5- . 

< r 2 »* 3 > 

_> ~ z — */i ■ 

— < X -C _ — 

— M£B 

— ~ — -■ 1 < 

u ■ < < »» -1 ob ai 

— r = x - 

-1 -x = 3 c = - 



t- p* a. ^ o * x 

w ■< — — =: 3 — 

x - Q O i- — W 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 2 - File 98-1321 

Department: 

Item: 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



Budget: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds in the 
amount of $182,573 for emergency work to demolish and 
remove the collapsed roof cover of the Southeast Water 
Pollution Control Plant's (SEWPCP) Digester No. 5. 

$182,573 

FY 1997-98 PUC Repair and Replacement Fund 

The Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant's Digester 
No. 5 holds the sludge coming from the sewer plant, 
reduces the volume, and prepares it for the landfill. Mr. 
Everett Hintze, of the Public Utilities Commission, 
advises that the cover of Digester No. 5 at the Water 
Pollution Control Division's Southeast Plant collapsed in 
December 1997. According to Mr. Hintze, the residual 
material left in the bottom of the digester and protected 
by the collapsed cover became a mosquito breeding 
ground. The infestation of mosquitoes became a nuisance 
to the neighboring area of Bay View Hunters Point. 
Immediate demolition and removal of the roof cover was 
required to protect the health and welfare of the Citizens 
of San Francisco. 

The PUC declared an emergency on January 2, 1998. In 
accordance with Section 6.30 of the Administrative Code, 
the PUC initiated expedited contract procedures and the 
PUC awarded a contract to A. Ruiz Construction Co. for 
$168,820 based on the adjusted low bid of $151,938 which 
takes into account the MBE/LBE status of the 
construction company. Changes to the contract resulted in 
the final construction cost increasing by $6,153 to 
$174,973. Mr. Hintze reports that three bids were 
received between December 22, 1997 and January 20, 
1998. Attachment I provided by PUC contains a list of the 
bidders and the amount bid. 

The total estimated project cost was $182,573 including 
$168,820 for the original construction contract amount, 
$6,153 for the change order and $7,600 for Department of 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Public Works (DPW) design costs. Attachment II provided 
by DPW contains the budget details for the design costs 
totaling $7,312 or $288 less than the estimate of $7,600. 

Comments: 1. The PUC reports that the demolition and removal of 

the roof cover began on February 18, 1998 and was 
completed on March 9, 1998. 

2. According to Mr. Hintze, the delay in the approval of 
this legislation was due to a backlog of paperwork, as a 
result of a large pile of emergencies caused by El Nino. 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



36/07/1998 13:20 



4155541877 



PMD 



Attachment 1 
Page 1 of 2 



PAGE 02 




AGENDA ITEM 



DEPARTMENT: Utilities Engineering Bureau 



AGENDA NO. 
MEETING DATE 



10 



July 28, 1998 



SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION: 

Approval of the Declaration of Emergency by the President of the Public Utilities Commission for Clean Water 
Program Contract No. CW-169E,"SEWPCP Digester No. 5 RoofCover Demolition" and Requesting the Board 
of Supervisors to Approve the expenditure of funds for emergency work to remove the collapsed roof cover of 
the Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant's (SEWPCP) Digester No. 5. 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION: 

The work performed under this Emergency consisted of demolishing and removing the collapsed roof cover of 
the Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant's Digester No. 5 and all related incidental work. PUC's Bureau of 
Water Pollution Control and DPW's Bureau of Engineering provided the design, and DPW's Bureau of 
Construction Management handled construction inspection. 

Three (3) Quotations were received between December 22, 1997 and January 20, 1998 as follows: 

Finn Quote Quote Adjusted Rank 



Quote 
Amount 



Quote 
Preference 



Adjusted 
Amount 



1. A.jRuiz Construction Co. $168,820.00 10% 
(MBE/LBE) 

San Francisco, C A 941 10 

2. Evans Bros., Inc. $159,950.00 0% 
Livermore, CA 94550 



$151,938.00 



$159,950.00 



1 



APPROVALS: 



BUREAU 



Romaine Boldridge 



finance Steven Car 


michael 


OENEAAL S' ^/y 
MANAGER L^--""*// L 


bi2_ 


r 



&B/07/1996 13:26 4155541877 PMD Attachment 1 PAG E 63 

Page 2 of 2 



Firm Quote Quote Adjusted Rank 

Amount Preference Amount 



3. Homer J. Olscn, Inc. $165,000.00 0% $165,000.00 3 

Union City, CA 94587 

(*) For comparison of quotes after application of business enterprise quote preferences. 

Work is of lump sum and unit bid item type. 

i 

The Engineer's Estimate for this contract was $170,000.00. The original contract as awarded to A. Ruiz 
Construction Co. was for $168,820.00. In addition, a change order Ln the amount of $6,153.00 was issued for 
the repair of Digester No. 10. The final contract cost with the addition of the change order was $182,573.00. 

Therefore, the cost of this project, including the change order, is $ 1 82,573.00: 

! 

Bureau of Engineering (Design) $ 7,600.00 

Original Construction Contract Amount $ 168,820.00 

Change Order : $ 6.153.00 

Total Project Cost $ 182,573.00 

This project is part of PUC's continuing Clean Water Repair and Replacement Program. Funds are available 
from the R&R Fund (Fund 5C/CPF/R&R, FAMIS Project No. CENRNRR915, Job Order No. 1464N and 
FAMIS Project No. CENRNRR95 1 , Job Order No. 1 572N). 

Affirmative Action 

Because this was an emergency contract, HRC subcontracting goals were not established by the HRC Contract 
Compliance Officer assigned to monitor the Clean Water Repair and Replacement program. 



A. Ruiz Construction Co. began the work on February 18, 1998 and completed it on March 9, 1998. 

CONTEXT OF THIS ACTION: 

i 

In December 1997, the Bureau of Water Pollution Control (BWPC) of the Public Utilities Commission 
recognize^ the need to demolish and remove the collapsed roof cover of SEWPCP Digester No. 5 to remedy a 
public nuisance caused by mosquitoes spawning in the digester. Although the collapsed roof cover of the 



10 



Attachment 2 



SEWPCP Digester No. 5 Cover Removal (1464N) - Design Expenditures for 
DPW - Bureau of Engineering - Structural Engineering Section 



Job Title 


Classification 


Approximate 

Hourly Rate 

($/hr.) 


Number of Hours 

Charged to Job 

Order 


Approximate 

Amount Charged to 

Job Order 


Assistant Civil 
Engineer 


5204 


$ 58 


108 


$ 6,264.00 


Civil Engineering 
Associate I 


5364 


$ 47 


8 


$ 376.00 


Civil Engineering 
Assistant II 


5362 


$ 42 


16 


$ 672.00 



Number of Hours Charged to Job Order: 
Total Amount Charged to Job Order: 



132 
7,312.00 ± 



11 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 3 - File 98-1280 



Department: 



Item: 



Location: 
Seller: 
Size of Lot: 
Purchase Price: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Department of Real Estate 
Public Libran - 

Resolution authorizing the purchase of the property 
located at 345 Randolph Street in order to demolish the 
existing vacant commercial building and construct a new 
Oceanview Branch Library; and adopting findings under 
the California Environmental Quality Act and findings 
pursuant to City Planning Code Section 101.1. 

Assessor's Block No. 7118, Lot No. 44 

Ms. Anna Lee 

Approximately 2,175 square feet of land area 

$197,500 including $10,000 in closing costs 

Previously appropriated funds included in the Public 
Library's FA' 1998-99 budget 

Approval of the proposed resolution would authorize the 
acquisition of the subject property, Block No. 7118. Lot 
No. 44, from Ms. Anna Lee for $197,500 for construction 
of a new, City-owned Oceanview Branch Librarj'. 

The subject property, consisting of a vacant, one-story 
commercial building on approximately 2,175 square feet 
of land, is located in the Oceanview neighborhood on the 
southeast corner of Randolph Street and Ramsell Street. 
The rectangular-shaped lot has dimensions of 
approximately 29' x 75', or a total of approximately 2,175 
square feet as noted above. In FY 1997-98, the Property 
was assessed at $250,000. Property taxes for FY 1997-98 
were approximately $2,975, based on a tax rate of $1.19 
per $100 of assessed valuation. According to the 
Assessor's Office, the current owner successfully appealed 
this assessment during FY 1997-98, and the assessment 
for FY 1998-99 will be $140,000. Regardless of this 
reassessment, the City will no longer receive any Property 
Taxes once the City acquires the subject property. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



12 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

At its August 18, 1998 meeting, the Library Commission 
will consider a resolution to acquire the subject property 
in order to construct a new, permanent Oceanview Branch 
Library. This new Branch Library would replace an 
existing leased facility, located at 111 Broad Street, now 
being used as the temporary Oceanview Branch Library. 
According to Ms. Claudine Venegas of the Department of 
Real Estate (DRE), the leased space is not in compliance 
with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

The Department of City Planning (DCP) has found that 
the proposed acquisition of the subject property is in 
conformity with the City's General Plan and consistent 
with the eight Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 
101.1. DCP has also found that the proposed acquisition 
and projected use of the subject property are exempt from 
Environmental Review under Class I of the California 
Environmental Quality Act. 

Comments: 1. As part of the Board of Supervisors approval of the 

Public Library"? FY 1998-99 budget, $2,500,000 was 
budgeted to pay for the subject $197,500 acquisition price 
as well as the demolition of the existing building and the 
design and construction of a new Oceanview Branch 
Library. 

2. According to Ms. Venegas of the DRE. the Oceanview 
Branch Library currently occupies 1,370 square feet of 
space at 111 Broad Street. The current monthly rent for 
this leased space is $827, or approximately $0.60 per 
square foot per month, or $9,924 per year. As noted 
above, the existing leased space does not comply with 
ADA requirements. According to Ms. Venegas, although 
the lease for this space expired on July 31, 1993. the 
Public Library has continued to lease the space on a 
month-to-month basis. According to Ms. Venegas, the 
reason for continuing this lease on a month-to-month 
basis instead of negotiating for a regular lease term is 
that the City cannot sign a lease on a property that does 
not comply with ADA requirements. According to Ms. 
Venegas, the Public Library expects to continue to occupy 
the existing leased space until the new Oceanview Branch 
Library is completed and ready for occupancy. According 
to Ms. Marcia Schneider of the Public Librarv. it is 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



anticipated that the new Oceanview Branch Library will 
be completed and operating in March of 2000. 

3. Ms. Venegas states that the DRE has determined that 
the purchase price of $187,500, or approximately $86.21 
per square foot based on the lot area of 2,175 square feet, 
represents the fair market value of the 345 Randolph 
Street property. The owner of the property has agreed to 
this purchase price and has entered into an Agreement of 
Purchase and Sale with the City, which is scheduled to 
close on or before November 6, 1998. Ms. Venegas 
estimates that the total costs to purchase the property, 
including $10,000 in closing costs, will be $197,500. 
According to Ms. Schneider, the $197,500 in acquisition 
costs for the 345 Randolph Street property is included in 
the $2,500,000 that has been appropriated in the FY 
1998-99 Public Library budget. As noted above, in 
addition to the acquisition price for the subject property, 
the $2,500,000 total project appropriation is estimated to 
also cover the costs for the demolition of the existing 
vacant commercial building and the design and 
construction of the new Oceanview Branch Library, 
according to Ms. Schneider. 

4. According to Ms. Schneider, the new two-story building 
will consist of 4,700 square feet, which is 3,330 square 
feet, or 243 percent more than the 1,370 square feet 
contained in the existing leased facility. The additional 
space in the new Branch Library will contain a new 
computer lab and a children's storjr telling room, along 
with expanded public space and other facilities designed 
to ensure ADA compliance, according to Ms. Schneider. 
As shown in the Attachment provided by Mr. Edgar Lopez 
of the Department of Public Works' Bureau of 
Architecture, the current estimated cost to acquire the 
property, as well as to pay for the demolition of the 
existing building and the design and construction of the 
new Branch Library, is $2,492,000, or $8,000 less than 
the $2,500,000 appropriated for the project in the Public 
Library's FY 1998-99 budget. According to Mr. Lopez, in 
November of 1998 the Public Library expects to initiate 
an Invitation to Bid process for the award of a 
construction contract. Construction is projected to begin 
in February of 1999, and to be completed, as noted above, 
in March of 2000. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

14 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution, based on the prior policy 

decision of the Board of Supervisors to approve funds in 
the Public Library's FY 1998-99 budget to construct a new 
Oceanview Branch Library, contingent on approval by the 
Library Commission at its meeting of August 18, 1998 to 
acquire the subject property. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

15 



Ctty and County o( San FnancWwf 




Willie Lewli Brown, Jr., Mayor 
Mark A. Prtmeau, AJA, Director and City Architect 



Po«t-rt* Fax Nole 



KICK. 



LS\J I NJSCM 



Z$Ms£ i 



ERrArv. u?pe? - 



PrVuf/gdA- 



U 



j^BBE 



OCEAN VIEW BRANCH LIBRARY 
PROPOSED BUDGET MENU 



PROPOSED BUDGET 



1 CONSTRUCTION, PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION 

Includes construction contract, construction contingency, art ennchment [2% of construction), hazardous 
malarial*, temporary relocation, fixed equipment 



$1,740,500 
•Ind. Site 



2 CLIENT DEPARTMENT SERVICES "Reserve $94,493 S.4% 

3 DPW PROJECT MANAGEMENT. $80,000 4.6% 

ReiponaiWlrdes Include management of project Cudgel & schedule from start-up to post-construction, monitoring 
01 project hxida. management ol design and construction contracts, reporting of flnandng 

4 AOOmONAL 8ERVICES $30,000 1.7% 
Environmental oversight A coordination, programming & planning, and management of agency approvals. 

5 OTY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES S10.000 0.6% 
Inctodee City Attorneys leee 

6 REGULATORY AGENCY APPROVALS $53,000 3.0% 
Includes permit fees. I planning fees. 

7 BASIC ARCHITECTURAL/ENGINEERING SERVICES $208,233 12.0% 

includes basic A/E design and construction administration services 

8 SUPPLEMENTAL A/E 6EHV1CES $57,000 3.3% 

Includes site & utilities assessments, existing conditions assessments & documentation, environmental review. (Budgeted) 

landscape architecture, ccot estimating, post construction services, quality assurance reviews 

B CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT $178,774 10 3% 

Includes baalc CM services, as well as prevailing wage monitoring, materials testing & Inspection. Enforcement 
of HRC requirements (MBE/WBE goals), certified payroll compliance, contract preparation, and scheduling 

10 GEOTECH., SURVEYE S40.OOO 2.3% 
Includes geotechnical investigations, surveys, hazardous malenais assessments 

1 1 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET $2,492,000 143.2% 

The figures listed above are budgetary assumptions lor the purpose of appropriation. These items represent typical project costs 
based upon previous proiect expenence and are included for discussion and consideration. They are predictions of expenditures 
by category, actual costs will be managed jointly by the San Francisco Public Library and the Department ol Public Works. 
Questions regarding this budget should be direcled lo the Pro(ect Archilect or the City Librarian o 




Igar Lor5«7 J ig' 

>W Prdjerjt Archrtect 



Edg 

DPW 

557-4675 



Dale 



7h/9i 



■V 



Date 



jL&^_ 



■IMPROVING THE QUAUTY OF UFE IN SAN FRANCISCO- We are dedicated ind.vaual, comnvltod ,o fwrmw*. cueftxner 
service and continuous Improvement in partnership witti the community. 
ConwM ' S " MC * Ttvnm* Cccmuouttmpmtment 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Item 4 -File 98-1088 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Department of Agriculture and Weights and Measures 

Ordinance amending the San Francisco Administrative 
Code by adding Chapter 9B thereto, authorizing the City 
Administrator to establish and regulate a Flea Market at 
100 Alemany Boulevard; charging vendors at the Market 
a fee for the privilege of selling at the Market; and 
ratifying and approving fees collected between June, 1996 
and the effective date of this ordinance. 

According to Mr. Sid Baker of the Department of 
Agriculture and Weights and Measures (Department), 
since June of 1996, the Department has operated a Flea 
Market at 100 Alemany Boulevard one day per week 
(Sunday) from approximately 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., for 
the sale of collectibles, crafts, antiques and other non- 
produce goods. The Department also operates a Farmer's 
Market one day per week (Saturday) at that location, at 
which certified farm vendors sell their produce. 

Although the Flea Market has been operating since June 
of 1996, according to Mr. Mario Kashou of the City 
Attorney's Office, legislation was never submitted to the 
Board of Supervisors to create such a market or to 
authorize fees because the Department of Agriculture was 
not aware that it needed Board approval until February of 
1998, when a City Attorney was first assigned to the 
Department. Previously, the Department of Agriculture 
believed that it could operate the Flea Market as a part of 
the Farmer's Market because, under Administrative Code 
Chapter 9A, the Department is authorized to operate the 
Farmer's Market. 

The proposed ordinance would formally authorize the City 
Administrator, through the Department of Agriculture 
and Weights and Measures, to operate the Flea Market at 
100 Alemany Boulevard. In addition, the proposed 
ordinance would officially establish (a) fees; (b) rules and 
regulations regarding the assignment of stall space, 
expulsion, maintenance of sanitary conditions and safe 
and orderly conduct; (c) procedures for obtaining 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

17 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



permission to sell; and (d) the processes of expelling 
vendors and filing appeals. 

The Department of Agriculture and Weights and 
Measures currently charges vendors at the Flea Market a 
daily fee of $20 per stall. Based on 192 stalls at the Flea 
Market, operating 52 days per year, revenues of up to 
$200,000 ($20 per stall per day x 192 stalls x 52 days per 
year) are realized by the City on an annual basis. Such 
revenues have been included in the Department's annual 
budgets since June of 1996. The Department's actual 
revenues from the Flea Market were $182,296 in FY 
1997-98. 

The proposed ordinance would also provide for an 
increase in the daily vendor fee of $10, from $20 per stall 
per day to $30 per stall per day, effective upon approval of 
the proposed ordinance by the Board of Supervisors. 
Wndors who pay in advance for an entire month would 
receive a 10 percent discount on the total charge for that 
month. 

The Department estimates that the proposed $10 per day 
fee increase, from $20 per stall per day to $30 per stall per 
day, would generate approximately $99,840 in additional 
revenues to the City annually ($10 extra per stall per day 
x 192 stalls x 52 days per year). 

In addition to the present operation on each Sunday, the 
Department of Agriculture and Weights and Measures is 
proposing to operate the Flea Market one additional day 
on Wednesdays of each week. The Department estimates 
that the additional revenue resulting from operating on 
each Wednesday would be approximately S78.000 
annually, based on a conservative estimate of 50 stalls at 
$30 per stall per day, 52 days per year. 

As such, the total estimated increase in revenues 
resulting from the proposed fee increase and the one 
additional day per week of operation for the Flea Market 
would be $177,840 annually ($99,840 plus $78,000). The 
Department's FY 1998-99 budget includes $377,520 in 
revenues from the Flea Market, including the $177,840 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

18 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

from the proposed increase in fees and the expansion of 
one additional day per week. 

The Department's FY 1998-99 budget reflects an increase 
of $8,071 (for materials and supplies) to operate the Flea 
Market one additional day per week. The Department 
advises that no other additional resources are necessary, 
as it plans to use existing personnel to operate the Flea 
Market on the extra day (Wednesday). The FY 1998-99 
budgeted cost of operating the Flea Market two days per 
week is $147,543. 

Attachment I, provided by the Department, shows the 
revenues and costs, as previously approved by the Board 
of Supervisors in the Department's FY 1998-99 budget, 
compared to the revenues and costs approved in the FY 
1997-98 budget. 

The ordinance further provides that the Board of 
Supervisors would ratify and approve the existing $20 fee 
per stall per day which has been charged by the 
Department to vendors since June of 1996. 

Comments: 1. Attachment II is a memorandum written by Mr. David 

Frieders, Agricultural Commissioner/ Director of Weights 
and Measures, explaining why the Department of 
Agriculture and Weights and Measures has been 
operating and charging fees at the Flea Market at 100 
Alemany Boulevard since June of 1996, without receiving 
prior Board of Supervisors approval. As previously noted, 
Mr. Kashou of the City Attorney's Office states that the 
Department of Agriculture and Weights and Measures 
was not aware that the Department needed approval for 
operating a Flea Market separate from the previously 
authorized operation of the Farmer's Market. 

2. The Department advises that the proposed fee increase 
and expansion of one additional day per week has not yet 
been implemented but would be effective upon approval of 
the proposed ordinance by the Board of Supervisors. 
According to Ms. Marilyn Martinez of the Department of 
Agriculture and Weights and Measures, the Department 
still expects to realize its budgeted revenues for FY 1998- 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

999 despite the delay in implementing the provisions of 
the proposed ordinance. 

3. As noted above, the total additional estimated 
revenues resulting from the proposed fee increase and the 
one additional day of operation of the Flea Market would 
be $177,840 annually, while the estimated increased costs 
would be only $8,071 annually. Overall, revenues from 
the Flea Market, which would total $377,520, would 
exceed budgeted costs of $147,543 by $229,977. Thus, 
approval of the proposed ordinance would result in a net 
revenue benefit to the General Fund of $229,977 in FY 
1998-99. The proposed ordinance states that, after FY 
1998-99, the City Administrator shall propose and the 
Board of Supervisors may adopt a new fee schedule for 
the Flea Market. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 




4152858776 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AND 

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 



Attachment I 



David C. Frieders 

A'rtcnltara] Commissioner 
Director of Vidjhu and Measures 



Sid K Baker 

Assistant AgricalUiial Comtnisaioner 
Director of Weights and Me 



RE: FLEA MARKET REVENUES AND COSTS 



FY 1997-98 Budgeted Revenues: 

$20/stall x 192 stalls x 52 days/year 



$199,680 



Proposed Fee Increase/Expansion: 

Fee Increase of SlO/stall x 192 stalls x 52 days/year $ 99,840 
Additional one day/week of operation (S30/stall x 50 stalls x 

52 weeks/year) $ 78,000 

Subtotal - Increase in Fee Revenues for YF 1998-99 $177,840 

FY 1998-99 Budgeted Costs:** 

Two-thirds of budgeted salaries for 2.65 FTE positions, plus overhead* $101,006 

Fringe Benefits @ 22% $ 22,222 

Services of Other Departments -Police $ 15,474 

Materials and Supplies $ 8.841 

Total FY 1998-99 Budgeted Costs - Flea Market $147,543 



* The 2.65 FTE consist of 1.0 FTE Market Manager, 1.0 FTE Senior Clerk Typist and one 0.65 FTE Custodian. 
"""The incremental cost of operating the Flea Market one extra day per week is $8,071 (for materials and supplies). 
The other costs of expanding the Flea Market by one day per week are being absorbed in the Department's existing 
budget 



Department of Agriculture 
501 Cesar Chavez, Suit* 109-A 
San Francisco, CA 94124 

(415)285-5010 



AlemanT Farmer's Marlut 

100 AJemany Bird. 

San Francisco, CA 94110 

(415)647-9423 



Weights and Measures 

501 Cesar Cfcsrrcx, Suite 109-A 

San Francisco, CA 94124 

(415) 2*5-5012 



eB/12/1998 16:15 



4152858776 



Attachment II 




CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AND 

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 



David C. Frieders 

AcrlcnHnral Oxnmis«lon<r 
Diracxor of Weights sod Maasuro 



August 12, 1998 

Harvey Rose 

Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

Dear Harvey 

The reason that I am requesting the fee adjustment for the Alemany Flea, is because the 
Flea Market originally started as a second fanners market and quickly grew into a flea 
market. Discussions between the City Attorneys office and myself determined that to 
continue the operation of the flea would require separate legislation allowing the fees that 
are currently being charged at the Alemany flea to be legal, and that a distinct separation 
of the two operations would be best for the operation of both markets 

If you have any questions . please don't hesitate to call 



Sincesery 



bmcejery, 



David C. Frieders 
Agricultural Commissioner/ 
Director of Weights anbd Measures 



Dapartmaot of Agriculture 
501 Cwr Chaves, Sdu 109- A 
S«n Frand*co, Ca 94124 
(4LS) 285-5010 



Alamanr Farmer' i Marks* 

100 Alsmanj Hvi 

Sao Frandim. CA 94110 

(415) 64T-942J 

22 



V\d£hu and Ma 
501 Caaar Oiavaj, Sou 109-A 

San Francisco. CA 94114 

(415) as- sol: 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Item 5 - File 98-997 

Department: Mayor's Office of Emergency Services 

Department of Emergency Communications 

Department of Telecommunications and Information 

Services 

Item: Ordinance amending Part 1. Chapter 7, of the San 

Francisco Administrative Code by amending Section 7.7 
to eliminate the authority of the Director of Emergency 
Services to manage the City's 911 Communications 
Facility, and amending Chapter 2A. by adding Article XII, 
Section 2A.200 to create a Department of Emergency 
Communications, under a Director of Emergency 
Communications, appointed by the Mayor, to operate the 
City's 911 Communications Facility. 

Description: Section 7.7 of the Administrative Code authorizes the 

position, defines the power, and establishes the duties of 
the Director of Emergency Services . Section 7.7 currently 
also provides that when the new E-911 Communications 
Facility is completed, the Director of Emergency Services 
shall manage the facility and direct all emergency 
dispatch operations. Construction of the facility is being 
managed by personnel assigned to the E-911 Project 
within the Department of Telecommunications and 
Information Services. 

This legislation would delete Section 7.7(b), thereby 
eliminating the authority of the Director of Emergency 
Services to manage and direct the operations of the City's 
E-911 Communications Facility upon completion. Instead, 
the proposed legislation would amend Chapter 2A by 
adding Article XII, Section 2A.200 to formally create a 
Department of Emergency Communications (ECD). The 
Mayor would appoint a Director of ECD who would serve 
as the department head for purposes of managing the 
construction and operation of the City's E-911 Combined 
Emergency Communications Center. 

During the construction phase of the City's new Combined 
Emergency Communications Center, known as the E-911 
Project, the appointed Director of the Department of 
Emergency Communications would serve as the Project 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 

Director for the E-911 Project . The E-911 Project is 
designed to improve the City's emergency response 
capabilities by integrating the City's (1) new, permanent 
Enhanced Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD)/Automated 
Information System (AIS), (2) the 800 MHz System, (3) 
the data radio system, (4) the Police Department Mobile 
Computing System, and (5) the 911 telephone system. 
According to Mr. Mike Martin, whose present title is 
Director of Emergency Services and Project Director for 
the E-911 Project, the Combined Emergency 
Communications Center is scheduled to become 
operational in December of 1999. 

Upon completion of the Combined Emergency 
Communications Center (CECC), the Director of the 
Department of Emergency Communications would 
manage the operations of the CECC and all systems 
related to taking calls from members of the public seeking 
emergency police, fire, and medical assistance and related 
to the dispatch of emergency police, fire and medical 
services. 

This proposed ordinance provides that all duties imposed 
on the Director of Emergency Communications related to 
operation of the CECC and the transfer of duties and staff 
from the Mayor's Office of Emergency Services and DTIS 
to the Department of Emergency Communications would 
be effective upon the date the Director of Emergency 
Communications certifies the completion of the CECC. 

Comment: Approval of this proposed ordinance would be consistent 

with the City's FY 1998-99 budget, previously approved 
by the Board of Supervisors, which established a 
$53,151,018 budget for the Department of Emergency 
Communications (ECD). including salaries and fringe 
benefits for 23.59 FTEs. Approval of this proposed 
ordinance would not result in any additional costs to the 
City. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Memo to Finance Committee 

August 19, 1998 Finance Committee Meeting 



Recommendation: 



Approve the proposed ordinance. 




'Harvey M. Rose 



Supervisor Teng 
President Kaufman 
Supervisor Newsom 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Supervisor Bierman 
Supervisor Brown 
Supervisor Katz 
Supervisor Leno 
Supervisor Medina 
Supervisor Yaki 
Supervisor Yee 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Gail Feldman 
Matthew Hymel 
Stephen Kawa 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

25